1 2012-10-21 00:00:02 asa1024 has quit (Quit: asa1024)
2 2012-10-21 00:00:09 <echelon> but i left this running since early this morning
3 2012-10-21 00:00:32 <jgarzik> sipa: what is tx= in SetBestChain log line? Total number of unspent transactions?
4 2012-10-21 00:00:41 <sipa> jgarzik: total number of transactions ever
5 2012-10-21 00:00:46 <jgarzik> echelon: probably don't have it, then
6 2012-10-21 00:00:55 <echelon> don't have what
7 2012-10-21 00:01:04 <sipa> jgarzik: for use in a future post-headers-first progress bar, mainly
8 2012-10-21 00:01:15 <sipa> as transactions are much better measure than blocks
9 2012-10-21 00:01:24 <jgarzik> echelon: the just-merged database backend rewrite
10 2012-10-21 00:01:59 <echelon> and that makes the loadblock feature work faster?
11 2012-10-21 00:02:09 <sipa> it makes everything faster :)
12 2012-10-21 00:02:20 <echelon> oh :/
13 2012-10-21 00:02:34 <sipa> but mostly block validation, and -loadblock is purely that
14 2012-10-21 00:02:42 <sipa> so there it should be very noticable
15 2012-10-21 00:03:32 <echelon> so should i abort this and try your thingy
16 2012-10-21 00:03:39 <jgarzik> he said thingy
17 2012-10-21 00:03:48 <sipa> haha :)
18 2012-10-21 00:04:00 <sipa> i don't dare counting how many man-hours it took :)
19 2012-10-21 00:09:11 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
20 2012-10-21 00:17:25 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
21 2012-10-21 00:17:48 root2 has joined
22 2012-10-21 00:20:28 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
23 2012-10-21 00:29:32 MC1984 has joined
24 2012-10-21 00:29:46 <sipa> gmaxwell: better suggest that on pullreq page #1889
25 2012-10-21 00:31:19 PhantomSpark has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
26 2012-10-21 00:31:26 <c_k> jgarzik: oops, I think you meant ckolivas
27 2012-10-21 00:31:35 <c_k> jgarzik: I am not him :)
28 2012-10-21 00:34:06 <Arnavion> Building src/leveldb fails if I pass CXXFLAGS to make
29 2012-10-21 00:34:13 random_cat_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
30 2012-10-21 00:34:15 <Arnavion> I suppose the workaround used in makefile.unix needs to be used there too
31 2012-10-21 00:34:39 <sipa> Arnavion: building leveldb automatically is somewhat of a hack
32 2012-10-21 00:34:58 <sipa> alternatively, build it yourself by first going into leveldb/ and running make there
33 2012-10-21 00:35:21 <Arnavion> Well it was just one line of change I needed to do
34 2012-10-21 00:35:23 <sipa> make libleveldb.a libmemenv.a
35 2012-10-21 00:35:27 <Arnavion> Not very hacky
36 2012-10-21 00:35:39 <sipa> ah
37 2012-10-21 00:35:45 <sipa> feel free to pullreq it then
38 2012-10-21 00:35:51 <Arnavion> Like I said, makefule.unix already has a workaround for the same reason
39 2012-10-21 00:35:57 <Arnavion> It uses xCXXFLAGS instead of CXXFLAGS
40 2012-10-21 00:35:59 <jgarzik> c_k: oh, sorry
41 2012-10-21 00:36:06 <jgarzik> thought he changed nicks
42 2012-10-21 00:36:14 random_cat_ has joined
43 2012-10-21 00:36:18 <c_k> all good :)
44 2012-10-21 00:36:25 <echelon> i thought there was going to be a way to trim old transactions to keep the size of the db down?
45 2012-10-21 00:37:05 <echelon> i think i remember reading it in the white paper
46 2012-10-21 00:37:12 * jgarzik returns to check on IBD... wow, a ton of orphans and already-have-block errors
47 2012-10-21 00:37:30 <sipa> echelon: the type of pruning supported by ultraprune is different from what the paper describes
48 2012-10-21 00:37:44 <sipa> (though it's not implemented)
49 2012-10-21 00:37:47 <echelon> oh
50 2012-10-21 00:37:51 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: you didn't -connect. :P
51 2012-10-21 00:38:03 <sipa> echelon: it will remove full blocks
52 2012-10-21 00:38:13 <sipa> echelon: but always keep unspent transaction outputs
53 2012-10-21 00:39:15 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: <shrug> this is a test of what others will see. my local node is the one that initiated the requests for these dups and orphans
54 2012-10-21 00:39:26 <jgarzik> it's not like it's the remote node's fault for that
55 2012-10-21 00:39:51 <jgarzik> [jgarzik@bd ~]$ grep -c 'ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block ' /spare/bitcoin/data/debug.log
56 2012-10-21 00:39:51 <jgarzik> 1841
57 2012-10-21 00:39:54 <jgarzik> that's just one run
58 2012-10-21 00:39:56 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: what happens is the node you're pull from gets a new block from the network, and then your node switches to pulling from it, trying to resolve from the new head.
59 2012-10-21 00:40:15 <gmaxwell> well at least thats what makes the orphans. Not sure about the already haves.
60 2012-10-21 00:47:10 <Arnavion> sipa: Making a pullreq is effort though, so have a gist of the patch. https://gist.github.com/3925338
61 2012-10-21 00:47:39 asuk has joined
62 2012-10-21 00:49:28 <gmaxwell> 10/20/12 23:21:57 SetBestChain: new best=00000000839a8e6886ab height=1 work=8590065666 tx=2 date=01/09/09 02:54:25
63 2012-10-21 00:49:31 <gmaxwell> 10/21/12 00:31:02 SetBestChain: new best=00000000000002f68b1e height=204208 work=547427517987481385917 tx=8170493 date=10/20/12 23:08:46
64 2012-10-21 00:50:58 <sipa> gmaxwell: synced how?
65 2012-10-21 00:51:51 <gmaxwell> p2p acrocess gig-e, w/ connect.
66 2012-10-21 00:52:41 <sipa> shouldn't be slower than loadblock
67 2012-10-21 00:53:21 <sipa> (i know it is - just saying that it can be improved)
68 2012-10-21 00:56:49 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
69 2012-10-21 00:57:23 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: remote node have blocks in pagecache?
70 2012-10-21 00:57:50 <jgarzik> well I guess gige is probably sufficient for the disk at any rate?
71 2012-10-21 01:00:46 Luke-Jr has quit (Excess Flood)
72 2012-10-21 01:00:53 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
73 2012-10-21 01:01:04 <gmaxwell> I think peopple will be pretty happy about the startup time improvement.
74 2012-10-21 01:01:06 Luke-Jr has joined
75 2012-10-21 01:01:52 one_zero has joined
76 2012-10-21 01:06:40 <MC1984> does the ibd improvements bring the curve of the chain growth below the curve of the march of technology
77 2012-10-21 01:06:49 <MC1984> has anyone ever quantified that
78 2012-10-21 01:07:23 <jgarzik> ultraprune upgrades the database backend, not IBD
79 2012-10-21 01:08:03 <jgarzik> indirectly speaking, IBD will go faster iff you are disk-bound with BDB (which many were, including on of my main boxes)
80 2012-10-21 01:08:27 <jgarzik> but work remains on peer selection; you can still get stuck
81 2012-10-21 01:08:32 <gmaxwell> MC1984: since no one was ever seeing it take >10 minutes on average to validate any block there wasn't any risk of it getting away.
82 2012-10-21 01:08:32 <MC1984> no the leveldb
83 2012-10-21 01:08:58 <sipa> MC1984: there are two changes now; ultraprune and leveldb
84 2012-10-21 01:09:07 <sipa> neither have any influence on the size of the block chain
85 2012-10-21 01:09:10 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: I still protest the use of 'stuck' there. "paused". :P
86 2012-10-21 01:09:15 <MC1984> I KNOW
87 2012-10-21 01:09:35 <sipa> well i don't understand your question in that case
88 2012-10-21 01:10:02 <gmaxwell> sipa: he was under the mistaken impression that the growth of the blockchain was faster than people could keep up with and was asking if we were back under it now.
89 2012-10-21 01:10:02 <MC1984> gmaxwell is right
90 2012-10-21 01:10:27 cande has quit (Quit: Lämnar)
91 2012-10-21 01:10:54 <sipa> MC1984: oh you mean people where the IBD system failed to do 1 block per 10 minutes?
92 2012-10-21 01:11:38 <MC1984> no i know its not getting away, but is IBD getting shorter or longer, given chain growth vs some sort of metric for average level of technology out there
93 2012-10-21 01:11:50 <MC1984> say just in the west for now, to make it simpler
94 2012-10-21 01:13:10 <MC1984> it strikes me the long term viability of bitcoin is tied to the r&d depts of the likes of intel, amd, seagate etc
95 2012-10-21 01:13:34 <MC1984> oh shit its them, they are satoshi
96 2012-10-21 01:13:36 <MC1984> !
97 2012-10-21 01:14:35 <jgarzik> sipa: thinking about headers-first, fill-in-blocks-later syncing... what, if anything, blows up if we only have headers for range X-infinity (where <X blocks are full, >=X blocks are headers only)?
98 2012-10-21 01:14:39 <jgarzik> what explodes
99 2012-10-21 01:14:53 <jgarzik> triggering an iterative header download seems straightforward
100 2012-10-21 01:15:03 <sipa> jgarzik: ?
101 2012-10-21 01:15:21 <jgarzik> sipa: does ultraprune support that configuration now?
102 2012-10-21 01:15:49 <jgarzik> would a header download need to write to block data (an empty block), or just to block index?
103 2012-10-21 01:16:13 <sipa> the blktree database format supports anything you like (see the enum BlockStatus in main.h)
104 2012-10-21 01:16:36 <sipa> no block data needs to be written if there is none
105 2012-10-21 01:16:50 <sipa> the blocks/ directory is there for blocks; block headers are in blktree/
106 2012-10-21 01:17:18 * jgarzik was thinking more about impact to P2P and RPC commands
107 2012-10-21 01:17:33 <jgarzik> there is no longer a global fClient state, but a per-block one
108 2012-10-21 01:17:52 <sipa> well the "current" block, as exposes by P2P and RPC, is still the tip of the currently-connected best chain
109 2012-10-21 01:18:01 <sipa> so you may have headers after that point
110 2012-10-21 01:18:52 <jgarzik> sipa: does the definition of "currently connected best chain" require full block data?
111 2012-10-21 01:18:56 <sipa> yes
112 2012-10-21 01:19:00 <jgarzik> ok
113 2012-10-21 01:19:12 <jgarzik> that's doable
114 2012-10-21 01:19:32 <sipa> it means the block whose UTXO state is currently reflected by pcoinsTip (aka coins/)
115 2012-10-21 01:20:22 asa1024 has joined
116 2012-10-21 01:20:24 <sipa> there are other modes of operation; if you allow the "current block" to be something for which you don't have a UTXO state, you're basically building an SPV client
117 2012-10-21 01:20:34 <sipa> i suppose that's also possible, but further ahead
118 2012-10-21 01:20:56 <jgarzik> sipa: what happens when importing a full block... if the block index is already present? block index is updated? not touched? overwritten?
119 2012-10-21 01:21:01 <jgarzik> s/if/is/
120 2012-10-21 01:21:21 <sipa> well, if it is marked with HAVE_BLOCK, it won't be written again
121 2012-10-21 01:22:02 <sipa> if BLOCK_VALID_CHAIN is already present, no ConnectBlock would be necessary anymore
122 2012-10-21 01:22:20 <jgarzik> sipa: presumably the headers-only download would add a bunch of VALID_HEADER
123 2012-10-21 01:22:44 <jgarzik> sipa: then pass #2 downloads, so as to transform VALID_HEADER -> HAVE_DATA
124 2012-10-21 01:23:40 <sipa> not really; i added it because enum states are cheap, but I don't think you want to store a header that can't be connected to the tree (what we currently call a n orphan block)
125 2012-10-21 01:24:09 <jgarzik> sipa: presumably it can be connected to the tree
126 2012-10-21 01:24:59 <sipa> how i see it: first, we switch the current getblocks logic to a getheaaders logic, and add processing for an incoming header to do the same as an incoming block does now, but only up to BLOCK_VALIDT_TREE
127 2012-10-21 01:25:15 <sipa> so that will build you a block tree in memory/blktree
128 2012-10-21 01:25:41 <jgarzik> consider a full HAVE_DATA dataset to height H=120000. the node would start up, download headers from H+1 to infinity, then come back, and iterate through each header, pulling block data.
129 2012-10-21 01:26:04 <sipa> then a process continuously searches for the best tree tip, and fetches blocks (from any peers known to have that many blocks)
130 2012-10-21 01:26:05 <jgarzik> those headers would not be accepted, if not connectable
131 2012-10-21 01:26:24 <sipa> along the best known path
132 2012-10-21 01:26:32 <sipa> this happens in parallel with the normal block-header sync
133 2012-10-21 01:27:26 <sipa> then a third process performs what is currently done in ConnectBlock, to take them from state VALID_TRANSACTIONS (reached when the block was downloaded, and before it got stored) to BLOCK_VALID_CHAIN
134 2012-10-21 01:27:46 <sipa> this moves the "current block" pointer
135 2012-10-21 01:27:47 guruvan- has joined
136 2012-10-21 01:28:18 <sipa> finally, a fourth process performs signature checking along the path, for blocks for which this hasn't been done yet
137 2012-10-21 01:28:28 <sipa> well, fourth, fifth, sixth, ...
138 2012-10-21 01:30:07 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
139 2012-10-21 01:32:51 TigrBot has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
140 2012-10-21 01:34:14 <sipa> you'd basically get several block pointers: best-known-header, best-known-header-with-known-data, currently-connected-block and currently-sigchecked-block
141 2012-10-21 01:34:32 <sipa> each being a predecessor of the previous
142 2012-10-21 01:34:52 <sipa> and each with one or more associated processes to catch up with it
143 2012-10-21 01:35:28 optimator has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
144 2012-10-21 01:35:58 optimator has joined
145 2012-10-21 01:35:59 optimator has quit (Changing host)
146 2012-10-21 01:35:59 optimator has joined
147 2012-10-21 01:45:04 arij has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
148 2012-10-21 01:52:49 asuk has joined
149 2012-10-21 01:55:05 rcorreia has joined
150 2012-10-21 01:57:12 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
151 2012-10-21 02:01:15 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
152 2012-10-21 02:02:01 elkingrey has joined
153 2012-10-21 02:03:39 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
154 2012-10-21 02:04:47 elkingrey has quit (Client Quit)
155 2012-10-21 02:05:14 denisx has joined
156 2012-10-21 02:05:14 denisx has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
157 2012-10-21 02:05:34 denisx has joined
158 2012-10-21 02:12:52 CMmike_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
159 2012-10-21 02:19:22 darkee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
160 2012-10-21 02:19:22 random_cat_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
161 2012-10-21 02:21:43 random_cat_ has joined
162 2012-10-21 02:24:38 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. puppy: it'd be wise to actual chat on here and not loiter.)
163 2012-10-21 02:25:56 Arnavion has quit (Quit: Arnavion)
164 2012-10-21 02:28:16 <forrestv> you can accidentally start two bitcoind instances if you specify different -port and -rpcport options; is there any danger of database corruption if you do that?
165 2012-10-21 02:28:48 RainbowDashh has joined
166 2012-10-21 02:31:58 prahanormal has joined
167 2012-10-21 02:36:04 <gmaxwell> hm. we have a lock file.
168 2012-10-21 02:38:05 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. puppy: it'd be wise to actual chat on here and not loiter.)
169 2012-10-21 02:42:00 RainbowDashh has joined
170 2012-10-21 02:45:15 TheEslbear has joined
171 2012-10-21 02:45:35 fiesh has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
172 2012-10-21 02:46:24 PiZZaMaN2K has joined
173 2012-10-21 02:46:49 fiesh has joined
174 2012-10-21 02:49:08 Eslbaer has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
175 2012-10-21 02:49:24 <forrestv> gmaxwell, hm. this is actually litecoin testnet... i definitely had four started. i'll look some into it
176 2012-10-21 02:49:44 <forrestv> actually, i can start multiple bitcoinds in that way
177 2012-10-21 02:51:28 <forrestv> or not
178 2012-10-21 02:51:37 <gmaxwell> there should be a .lock created.
179 2012-10-21 02:52:17 <echelon> is it possible to make the debug.log not as verbose?
180 2012-10-21 02:55:05 <MC1984> would be nice if it didnt print how happy it is about every block
181 2012-10-21 02:55:12 <jgarzik> gut feeling: ultraprune is so fast, it exacerbates some IBD races/problems
182 2012-10-21 02:55:15 <echelon> heh
183 2012-10-21 02:55:33 <jgarzik> I am seeing thousands of orphans and dups here
184 2012-10-21 02:55:44 <jgarzik> but progress continues, and it never gets truly stuck
185 2012-10-21 02:57:58 asuk has joined
186 2012-10-21 03:02:04 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: I'd really thought it was the other way: slower IBD makes it more likely to get tripped up. if its fast enough you'll pull it all before another block triggers you into orphan space.
187 2012-10-21 03:02:23 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
188 2012-10-21 03:12:32 Karmaon has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
189 2012-10-21 03:13:34 Arnavion has joined
190 2012-10-21 03:17:20 echelon has quit (Quit: echelon)
191 2012-10-21 03:19:06 vampireb has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
192 2012-10-21 03:23:36 Arnavion has quit (Quit: Arnavion)
193 2012-10-21 03:27:51 freakazoid has joined
194 2012-10-21 03:31:12 Transfuta has quit (Excess Flood)
195 2012-10-21 03:38:25 Transfusion has joined
196 2012-10-21 03:41:04 DerCoin has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
197 2012-10-21 03:44:28 Perlboy has joined
198 2012-10-21 03:45:10 random_cat_ is now known as random_cat
199 2012-10-21 03:46:30 Transfusion is now known as Transfuta
200 2012-10-21 03:48:31 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
201 2012-10-21 03:48:39 [7] has joined
202 2012-10-21 03:53:43 PiZZaMaN2K is now known as PiZZaMaN2K|away
203 2012-10-21 03:56:58 rdponticelli has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
204 2012-10-21 03:58:27 asuk has joined
205 2012-10-21 04:03:15 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
206 2012-10-21 04:03:16 rdponticelli has joined
207 2012-10-21 04:04:09 <jgarzik> kjj_: quoting fsck-up https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=117982.msg1286972#msg1286972
208 2012-10-21 04:10:04 prahanormal has quit ()
209 2012-10-21 04:14:09 BlackPrapor has joined
210 2012-10-21 04:14:46 BlackPrapor has quit (Client Quit)
211 2012-10-21 04:21:17 Karmaon has joined
212 2012-10-21 04:21:17 Karmaon has quit (Changing host)
213 2012-10-21 04:21:17 Karmaon has joined
214 2012-10-21 04:29:03 da2ce7 has joined
215 2012-10-21 04:31:14 da2ce7_d has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
216 2012-10-21 04:33:37 D34TH_ has joined
217 2012-10-21 04:34:13 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
218 2012-10-21 04:35:53 rlifchitz has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
219 2012-10-21 04:36:22 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
220 2012-10-21 04:38:57 spreelanka has quit (Quit: spreelanka)
221 2012-10-21 04:39:13 rlifchitz has joined
222 2012-10-21 04:39:13 rlifchitz has quit (Changing host)
223 2012-10-21 04:39:13 rlifchitz has joined
224 2012-10-21 04:41:08 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
225 2012-10-21 04:41:54 D34TH_ is now known as D34TH
226 2012-10-21 04:41:55 rcorreia has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
227 2012-10-21 04:42:02 D34TH has quit (Changing host)
228 2012-10-21 04:42:02 D34TH has joined
229 2012-10-21 04:42:42 rcorreia has joined
230 2012-10-21 04:57:16 <MC1984> "ASIC's are not a natural technological generation leap like going from CPU to GPU was. ASIC's are simply specialized processing units made specifically for Bitcoin.ASIC's are not a natural technological generation leap like going from CPU to GPU was. ASIC's are simply specialized processing units made specifically for Bitcoin."
231 2012-10-21 04:57:45 <MC1984> i dont know why that came out twice, jokes on me
232 2012-10-21 04:58:43 asuk has joined
233 2012-10-21 05:03:17 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
234 2012-10-21 05:08:33 MiningBuddy- has joined
235 2012-10-21 05:08:51 MiningBuddy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
236 2012-10-21 05:17:28 Gladamas has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
237 2012-10-21 05:18:33 Gladamas has joined
238 2012-10-21 05:20:36 PixelPatriot has joined
239 2012-10-21 05:21:39 asa1024 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
240 2012-10-21 05:21:54 BlackPrapor has joined
241 2012-10-21 05:22:00 asa1024 has joined
242 2012-10-21 05:24:01 PixelPatriot has left ()
243 2012-10-21 05:29:10 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
244 2012-10-21 05:29:17 versakill00 has joined
245 2012-10-21 05:29:40 <versakill00> It looks like Gmaxwell doesn't want a Bitcoin-Qt Wikipedia article.
246 2012-10-21 05:30:39 <versakill00> Why?
247 2012-10-21 05:32:34 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
248 2012-10-21 05:32:46 RainbowDashh has joined
249 2012-10-21 05:32:55 <gmaxwell> versakill00: because there ought not be one.
250 2012-10-21 05:33:27 <gmaxwell> Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a software directory. The little there is to say about the reference software can be said in the main bitcoin article
251 2012-10-21 05:33:48 maaku has joined
252 2012-10-21 05:33:53 <gmaxwell> As far as I can tell the only reason the article was created is because Atlas and his socks were removing all mention of it from the main Bitcoin article.
253 2012-10-21 05:34:10 <versakill00> :(
254 2012-10-21 05:34:23 <MC1984> edit warz
255 2012-10-21 05:34:58 <MC1984> i contributed to wikipedia once, it was a minor spelling or grammar correction
256 2012-10-21 05:35:00 <versakill00> "Mining and node implementations include core software such as Bitcoind/Bitcoin-Qt, libbitcoin, cbitcoin[38] and BitCoinJ.[39][40] As of 2012, Bitcoind is the only one capable of fully verifying the Blockchain.[citation needed] It is still the most widely used implementation.[citation needed]"
257 2012-10-21 05:35:00 <MC1984> it got reverted
258 2012-10-21 05:35:27 stamit has joined
259 2012-10-21 05:35:36 <versakill00> that needs to be cited hmm
260 2012-10-21 05:36:29 stamit has left ()
261 2012-10-21 05:36:33 <gmaxwell> The JS implementation is close to complete, but I'm very skeptical if its correct. (simply because its creation didn't result in a pile of bug reports)
262 2012-10-21 05:36:49 Hasimir is now known as HasimirTest
263 2012-10-21 05:36:55 HasimirTest is now known as Hasimir
264 2012-10-21 05:37:36 <gmaxwell> The bitcoin article is basically crap now, it basically provides no distinguishing of node types, no technical details on how the system worksâ says basically nothing about the consensus algorithim, etc.
265 2012-10-21 05:37:48 denisx has joined
266 2012-10-21 05:39:11 <versakill00> there's a bitcoin mining section
267 2012-10-21 05:39:18 Arnavion has joined
268 2012-10-21 05:39:57 ovidiusoft has joined
269 2012-10-21 05:41:52 skeledrew has joined
270 2012-10-21 05:43:28 versakill00 has quit (Quit: Page closed)
271 2012-10-21 05:50:59 <gmaxwell> versakill00 which gives minutia that would be better covered with a link to [[Hashcash]] but it never says how bitcoin achieves consensusâ which is the invention that makes bitcoin _possible_
272 2012-10-21 05:51:19 <gmaxwell> the article is embarassing now, it's just been warred over by people pushing stupid politics.
273 2012-10-21 05:58:35 <MC1984> shit is the SEC really looking into the pirate HYIP scheme?
274 2012-10-21 05:59:11 asuk has joined
275 2012-10-21 05:59:44 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
276 2012-10-21 06:03:42 sudog has joined
277 2012-10-21 06:03:55 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
278 2012-10-21 06:10:08 <lianj> Luke-Jr: your node down?
279 2012-10-21 06:14:55 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
280 2012-10-21 06:18:16 BlackPrapor has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
281 2012-10-21 06:18:46 RainbowDashh has joined
282 2012-10-21 06:27:02 conman has joined
283 2012-10-21 06:27:45 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
284 2012-10-21 06:27:57 <midnightmagic> AAAARGH it's The Graph again!
285 2012-10-21 06:28:03 <midnightmagic> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Total_bitcoins_over_time.png
286 2012-10-21 06:29:22 <conman> heh 2am in jgarzik town; probably not a good time to start a chat
287 2012-10-21 06:39:51 Arnavion has quit (Quit: Arnavion)
288 2012-10-21 06:50:19 BlackPrapor has joined
289 2012-10-21 06:51:11 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
290 2012-10-21 06:56:35 RainbowD_ has joined
291 2012-10-21 06:57:58 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
292 2012-10-21 06:57:59 RainbowD_ is now known as RainbowDashh
293 2012-10-21 06:59:35 asuk has joined
294 2012-10-21 07:02:27 Gladamas has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
295 2012-10-21 07:04:30 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
296 2012-10-21 07:05:20 Gladamas has joined
297 2012-10-21 07:07:31 RainbowD_ has joined
298 2012-10-21 07:07:31 RainbowD_ has quit (Changing host)
299 2012-10-21 07:07:31 RainbowD_ has joined
300 2012-10-21 07:08:07 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
301 2012-10-21 07:12:45 <jgarzik> woah, wtf?
302 2012-10-21 07:12:59 <jgarzik> my balance disappeared, post ultraprune upgrade
303 2012-10-21 07:13:07 RainbowD_ is now known as RainbowDashh
304 2012-10-21 07:13:27 <jgarzik> 'listtransactions' accurately shows my last transaction, but 'listunspent' returns nothing, and 'getbalance' returns 0.0
305 2012-10-21 07:13:49 <jgarzik> restoring wallet from pre-ultraprune backup, doing -rescan under ultraprune, restores expected balance
306 2012-10-21 07:13:50 nsh has joined
307 2012-10-21 07:13:57 <jgarzik> not good
308 2012-10-21 07:14:58 <jgarzik> wallet.dat.bad and wallet.dat.good are same size, but cmp -l shows differences
309 2012-10-21 07:15:13 <conman> sounds like you have bigger problems to deal with
310 2012-10-21 07:16:37 <jgarzik> it's 3am here, gonna take some cough medicine and sleep
311 2012-10-21 07:16:49 <conman> sleep tight
312 2012-10-21 07:16:57 <jgarzik> conman: we need to figure out those GBT improvements
313 2012-10-21 07:17:04 <jgarzik> (some other night than tonight :))
314 2012-10-21 07:17:07 <conman> right
315 2012-10-21 07:17:14 <conman> maybe tomorrow earlier
316 2012-10-21 07:17:18 <conman> I'm home during the day
317 2012-10-21 07:20:33 <MC1984> is consensus on that most recent bitcoin research paper that its bunk?
318 2012-10-21 07:21:29 <copumpkin> the shamir one?
319 2012-10-21 07:25:16 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
320 2012-10-21 07:25:59 JZavala has joined
321 2012-10-21 07:28:56 RainbowDashh has joined
322 2012-10-21 07:28:56 RainbowDashh has quit (Changing host)
323 2012-10-21 07:28:56 RainbowDashh has joined
324 2012-10-21 07:29:50 Arnavion has joined
325 2012-10-21 07:29:52 Gladamas has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
326 2012-10-21 07:31:53 Gladamas has joined
327 2012-10-21 07:34:31 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: reproduced here, interestingly on a node that was an older version of ultraprune previously.
328 2012-10-21 07:34:58 <gmaxwell> deleted the chain, resynced it under new ultraprune.. no balance.. but I see transactions
329 2012-10-21 07:38:04 <MC1984> yes
330 2012-10-21 07:38:53 TheEslbear has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
331 2012-10-21 07:39:02 mologie_ has joined
332 2012-10-21 07:39:11 TheEslbear has joined
333 2012-10-21 07:40:25 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
334 2012-10-21 07:40:30 mologie has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
335 2012-10-21 07:40:30 mologie_ is now known as mologie
336 2012-10-21 07:59:54 asuk has joined
337 2012-10-21 08:02:22 bengl has joined
338 2012-10-21 08:04:26 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
339 2012-10-21 08:07:54 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
340 2012-10-21 08:09:19 darkee has joined
341 2012-10-21 08:13:14 mykhal has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
342 2012-10-21 08:13:22 tonikt2 has joined
343 2012-10-21 08:16:21 tonikt has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
344 2012-10-21 08:18:12 cheako has joined
345 2012-10-21 08:24:06 aq has joined
346 2012-10-21 08:25:35 dvide has joined
347 2012-10-21 08:25:51 mykhal has joined
348 2012-10-21 08:27:15 aq83 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
349 2012-10-21 08:27:43 pusle has joined
350 2012-10-21 08:49:36 tonikt has joined
351 2012-10-21 08:52:13 tonikt2 has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
352 2012-10-21 08:53:42 setkeh has quit (Read error: No route to host)
353 2012-10-21 08:54:14 Arnavion has quit (Quit: Arnavion)
354 2012-10-21 08:54:25 Arnavion has joined
355 2012-10-21 08:54:31 setkeh has joined
356 2012-10-21 09:00:19 asuk has joined
357 2012-10-21 09:01:35 mmoya has joined
358 2012-10-21 09:03:11 Diablo-D3 has joined
359 2012-10-21 09:04:05 <gmaxwell> what the fuck.
360 2012-10-21 09:04:13 <gmaxwell> atlas is running around rallying against ultraprune
361 2012-10-21 09:04:17 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: notice you took care of that fucking thread
362 2012-10-21 09:04:51 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
363 2012-10-21 09:05:03 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: I wonder if all the BFL people can just be banned on the forum
364 2012-10-21 09:05:23 Arnavion has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
365 2012-10-21 09:05:38 Arnavion has joined
366 2012-10-21 09:07:16 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: do you still have any room free in your mailbox?
367 2012-10-21 09:07:57 * Diablo-D3 checks
368 2012-10-21 09:08:06 <Diablo-D3> google says 0.4 of my 10.1 used.
369 2012-10-21 09:08:21 <Diablo-D3> thats gb, btw
370 2012-10-21 09:09:33 <gmaxwell> hm. I could have sworn I had a gigabytes of complaints on that thread already.
371 2012-10-21 09:10:00 <Diablo-D3> seriously though, I wonder if theymos could officially warn them or something
372 2012-10-21 09:12:17 <midnightmagic> Why bother? What are commercial companies even doing trying to carry on business on a forum filled with trolly mctrollersons?
373 2012-10-21 09:12:37 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: that isnt it
374 2012-10-21 09:12:41 <Diablo-D3> they HIRE people to troll the forums
375 2012-10-21 09:12:47 <Diablo-D3> as far as I can tall, thats all they hired inaba for
376 2012-10-21 09:12:48 <midnightmagic> And why do you expect businesses to operate at a higher standard than the endless socks and trolls?
377 2012-10-21 09:13:32 <midnightmagic> If you're going to hold BFL / CP to a standard, it's time to start slamming the banhammer down on the endless douchebaggeries that are far, far less civil.
378 2012-10-21 09:13:34 * gmaxwell is looking for the hemlock
379 2012-10-21 09:13:59 <midnightmagic> I hear hemlock is a good way to go.
380 2012-10-21 09:14:10 <gmaxwell> Inaba and CP both believe they are in the right, for reasons that make sense to me when I consider their perspectives.
381 2012-10-21 09:14:47 <Diablo-D3> except
382 2012-10-21 09:14:51 <Diablo-D3> it violates one of the golden rules
383 2012-10-21 09:14:51 <gmaxwell> They've also been civilâ except for their persistance in their bickering.
384 2012-10-21 09:14:52 <midnightmagic> Hey man, your mod, your rules. They don't like it, they can retreat to their own forums that nobody ever visits.
385 2012-10-21 09:14:55 <midnightmagic> lol
386 2012-10-21 09:15:04 <Diablo-D3> dont troll other people's threads, especially when they're your competitor
387 2012-10-21 09:15:13 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: That's b-s, it's a forum.
388 2012-10-21 09:15:22 <Diablo-D3> bfl did it before with enterpoint, and I publicly shamed them for that
389 2012-10-21 09:15:35 <gmaxwell> yea, but it's self suicide, thats a social norm for sureâ and because of breaking it a lot of people have lost respect for Inaba.
390 2012-10-21 09:15:39 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: in the real world, it would be anticompetitive behavior and DoJ worthy.
391 2012-10-21 09:15:55 <Diablo-D3> but none of these are real companies, so /me shrugs
392 2012-10-21 09:15:58 <gmaxwell> I'm doing CP a favor by _not_ removing Inaba. :(
393 2012-10-21 09:15:59 <midnightmagic> I never hear anybody complaining about all the trolls when they attack BFL.
394 2012-10-21 09:16:12 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: I get reports of that too
395 2012-10-21 09:16:40 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: People complain. BFL complained. And I did a similar stuff. Asked people to chill out... and nuked threats and severe incivility. (which there hasn't been in this case)
396 2012-10-21 09:16:48 <gmaxwell> s/ a //
397 2012-10-21 09:16:54 <midnightmagic> WHoah, threats?!
398 2012-10-21 09:17:06 <Diablo-D3> yeah, its nuts
399 2012-10-21 09:17:19 <Diablo-D3> I warned people not to invest in BFL, they didnt listen, so everyone can just shut the fuck up.
400 2012-10-21 09:17:22 ThomasV has joined
401 2012-10-21 09:17:26 <midnightmagic> It must be a sort of .. weird inbred dysfunctional social group dynamic going on..
402 2012-10-21 09:17:29 <Diablo-D3> you lost your money, deal with it
403 2012-10-21 09:17:36 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: basically.
404 2012-10-21 09:17:40 <midnightmagic> "lost your money"?
405 2012-10-21 09:18:50 <Diablo-D3> yes, I do not think bfl is going to deliver
406 2012-10-21 09:18:55 <midnightmagic> Like, ever?
407 2012-10-21 09:19:00 <Diablo-D3> pretty sure
408 2012-10-21 09:19:04 <Diablo-D3> even if they do, you still got screwed.
409 2012-10-21 09:19:04 <midnightmagic> lol
410 2012-10-21 09:19:17 <midnightmagic> You know something I don't?
411 2012-10-21 09:19:33 <midnightmagic> Good heavens, you're not reading PMs too are you?
412 2012-10-21 09:19:47 <Diablo-D3> if they dont deliver: your money is gone.
413 2012-10-21 09:19:56 <gmaxwell> MiningBuddy-: Wouldn't you like to know?
414 2012-10-21 09:19:59 <gmaxwell> oops midnightmagic
415 2012-10-21 09:20:03 <midnightmagic> lol
416 2012-10-21 09:20:13 <Diablo-D3> if they do deliver: difficulty is going to rise 100x in the next 3 months, 1000x by the next 2 years.
417 2012-10-21 09:20:17 <midnightmagic> That mental image is excellent.
418 2012-10-21 09:20:47 <Diablo-D3> bfl TCO is so high that you may not pay them off unless you have them mining for all 3 of those months
419 2012-10-21 09:20:51 <JyZyXEL> if jeri ellsworth was able to produce a working asic on her first try then so can anyone
420 2012-10-21 09:20:52 <Diablo-D3> which is dec/jan/feb
421 2012-10-21 09:21:04 <JyZyXEL> and she had to make a whole computers worth
422 2012-10-21 09:21:09 <Diablo-D3> bfl may miss the chinese new year deadline
423 2012-10-21 09:21:17 <midnightmagic> 100x? You're trying to say difficulty is going up to 2000TH?
424 2012-10-21 09:21:20 <Diablo-D3> if they do, they're fucked.
425 2012-10-21 09:21:32 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: yeah, somewhere around there
426 2012-10-21 09:21:35 <conman> it will be at least 50x
427 2012-10-21 09:21:37 <midnightmagic> LOL
428 2012-10-21 09:21:59 <midnightmagic> Since when did BFL say they were going to deliver all orders inside of 3 months?
429 2012-10-21 09:22:17 <midnightmagic> Last I heard, they were delivering order #3000 somewhere by next Feb.
430 2012-10-21 09:22:19 <Diablo-D3> remember, if bfl DOES ship but misses the chinese new year launch window, asicminer will beat them
431 2012-10-21 09:22:38 <Diablo-D3> so by the time anyone gets their BFL hardware, its worthless.
432 2012-10-21 09:22:39 <midnightmagic> right with all their 12TH and broken assets.
433 2012-10-21 09:22:42 <JyZyXEL> how long is the chinese new year?
434 2012-10-21 09:22:46 <midnightmagic> and competing against their own customers.
435 2012-10-21 09:22:49 <Diablo-D3> JyZyXEL: one month.
436 2012-10-21 09:23:12 <JyZyXEL> gotta love those 3 month dealextreme deliveries :p
437 2012-10-21 09:23:28 <Diablo-D3> everything is shut down by the end of the first week of jan
438 2012-10-21 09:23:57 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: and undermining confidence in bitcoin by demonstrating the viability of a single party with a substantial fraction of the hashpower.
439 2012-10-21 09:24:10 <Diablo-D3> >broken assets
440 2012-10-21 09:24:11 <Diablo-D3> hrm?
441 2012-10-21 09:24:16 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: Right! That too..
442 2012-10-21 09:24:31 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: What are asicminer shares worth right now and how can they be bought?
443 2012-10-21 09:24:45 <Diablo-D3> you cant buy any unless someone is willing to sell
444 2012-10-21 09:25:10 <Diablo-D3> friedcat is currently collecting claims of ownership for people who can sufficiently prove it ahead of glbse releasing data
445 2012-10-21 09:25:30 <midnightmagic> "sufficiently prove it"? What does that mean?
446 2012-10-21 09:25:34 <Diablo-D3> screenshots, etc
447 2012-10-21 09:25:40 <midnightmagic> photoshopshots
448 2012-10-21 09:25:46 * Diablo-D3 shrugs
449 2012-10-21 09:25:58 <Diablo-D3> DMC claimed we only have 1000, so its not like its a huge claim
450 2012-10-21 09:26:00 * midnightmagic respects friedcat even more now.
451 2012-10-21 09:26:22 <midnightmagic> ah, that was a cruel thing to say.. I retract that, I didn't mean that.
452 2012-10-21 09:26:31 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: btw, not all asicminer shares were held on glbse
453 2012-10-21 09:26:37 <Diablo-D3> many people held them with friedcat directly
454 2012-10-21 09:26:47 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: I am aware of that. Lots were held directly with friends and family.
455 2012-10-21 09:27:12 <Diablo-D3> yeah, and friedcat's own company owns like what, 10% of the shit?
456 2012-10-21 09:27:15 CodesInChaos has joined
457 2012-10-21 09:27:19 <midnightmagic> Not a nepotistic little org of concentrated hashrate at all.. :-/
458 2012-10-21 09:27:31 * Diablo-D3 shrugs
459 2012-10-21 09:27:36 <Diablo-D3> if they can get shit going, its fine
460 2012-10-21 09:27:44 <gmaxwell> no worries, I can prove the transactions I want reversed were really mine; I've got screenshots.
461 2012-10-21 09:27:56 <Diablo-D3> the surviving companies will just have to work harder
462 2012-10-21 09:28:01 <Diablo-D3> and bfl wont survive
463 2012-10-21 09:30:02 <midnightmagic> There are a lot of people with very high estimates of "within 3 months" hashrate..
464 2012-10-21 09:30:02 bladezor has joined
465 2012-10-21 09:30:14 <midnightmagic> .. but nobody ever says how they calculate it.
466 2012-10-21 09:30:15 <bladezor> Argh
467 2012-10-21 09:30:22 <bladezor> Testnet difficulty is up to 201
468 2012-10-21 09:30:29 <bladezor> and bitcoin testnet faucet is down
469 2012-10-21 09:30:49 <gmaxwell> bladezor: you can mine a block at difficulty 1 after a 20 minute gap...
470 2012-10-21 09:30:58 <gmaxwell> bladezor: or give me an address and I'll send you some coins.
471 2012-10-21 09:31:28 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: its based on estimates of hardware shipping
472 2012-10-21 09:32:36 <bladezor> gmaxwell: how do I set the difficulty in bitcoind?
473 2012-10-21 09:33:02 <midnightmagic> bladezor: You can't set it, it's a calculated, derived value built from incoming blocks.
474 2012-10-21 09:33:09 <gmaxwell> bladezor: you don'tâ it automatically will go to one after there has been a 20 minute gap.
475 2012-10-21 09:33:14 <gmaxwell> (in testnet)
476 2012-10-21 09:33:16 <bladezor> oh okay
477 2012-10-21 09:34:05 <bladezor> gmaxwell: ms7d6bFfEeUG2wm9CCGn9nXFJHHKXgv2b9
478 2012-10-21 09:34:08 <bladezor> Thanks :)
479 2012-10-21 09:35:52 <gmaxwell> febb1285ac1b4e44add5a3d807efe10c3a87378425463bb9fd58f056bf000316
480 2012-10-21 09:37:18 MiningBuddy- is now known as MiningBuddy
481 2012-10-21 09:37:19 MiningBuddy has quit (Changing host)
482 2012-10-21 09:37:19 MiningBuddy has joined
483 2012-10-21 09:37:52 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
484 2012-10-21 09:38:18 sirk390 has joined
485 2012-10-21 09:42:22 sirk390 has left ()
486 2012-10-21 09:43:35 leotreasure has joined
487 2012-10-21 09:47:03 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
488 2012-10-21 09:47:48 leotreasure has joined
489 2012-10-21 09:48:38 bengl has left ()
490 2012-10-21 09:48:38 <sipa> jgarzik: can you db5.1_dump both wallets, and tell/give/show the difference? (removing private keys, of course)
491 2012-10-21 09:49:19 <sipa> jgarzik: iirc with -p, private keys really show up as "...key....."
492 2012-10-21 09:50:39 leotreasure_ has joined
493 2012-10-21 09:51:55 bladezor has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
494 2012-10-21 09:52:13 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
495 2012-10-21 09:53:43 aq has quit (2!~aq83@chello080109197142.2.graz.surfer.at|Quit: KVIrc 4.2.0 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/)
496 2012-10-21 09:54:28 aq83 has joined
497 2012-10-21 09:54:53 leotreasure_ is now known as leotreasure
498 2012-10-21 09:56:24 leotreasure has left ()
499 2012-10-21 10:00:41 asuk has joined
500 2012-10-21 10:04:33 RazielZ has joined
501 2012-10-21 10:05:29 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
502 2012-10-21 10:13:46 bitcoinz has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
503 2012-10-21 10:16:22 bitcoinz has joined
504 2012-10-21 10:21:32 bitcoinz has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
505 2012-10-21 10:22:51 leotreasure has joined
506 2012-10-21 10:32:40 leotreasure_ has joined
507 2012-10-21 10:34:58 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
508 2012-10-21 10:35:53 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. puppy: it'd be wise to actual chat on here and not loiter.)
509 2012-10-21 10:37:47 leotreasure_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
510 2012-10-21 10:38:34 leotreasure has joined
511 2012-10-21 10:40:39 Ahimoth_ has joined
512 2012-10-21 10:40:58 paraipan has joined
513 2012-10-21 10:41:48 Ahimoth has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
514 2012-10-21 10:41:48 Ahimoth_ is now known as Ahimoth
515 2012-10-21 10:48:13 BlackPrapor has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
516 2012-10-21 10:49:32 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
517 2012-10-21 10:51:00 leotreasure has joined
518 2012-10-21 10:53:01 Impaler has joined
519 2012-10-21 10:53:15 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
520 2012-10-21 10:54:03 leotreasure has joined
521 2012-10-21 10:57:09 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
522 2012-10-21 11:01:01 asuk has joined
523 2012-10-21 11:05:24 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
524 2012-10-21 11:12:58 leotreasure has joined
525 2012-10-21 11:17:28 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
526 2012-10-21 11:17:35 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
527 2012-10-21 11:18:38 leotreasure has joined
528 2012-10-21 11:23:09 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
529 2012-10-21 11:24:14 BlackPrapor has joined
530 2012-10-21 11:26:37 leotreasure has joined
531 2012-10-21 11:26:58 datagutt has joined
532 2012-10-21 11:28:47 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
533 2012-10-21 11:29:34 leotreasure has joined
534 2012-10-21 11:31:28 Impaler has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
535 2012-10-21 11:34:54 asuk has joined
536 2012-10-21 11:39:32 guruvan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
537 2012-10-21 11:39:44 guruvan- is now known as guruvan
538 2012-10-21 11:40:50 sudog has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
539 2012-10-21 11:41:23 guruvan_ has joined
540 2012-10-21 11:43:26 sirk390 has joined
541 2012-10-21 11:43:53 sirk390 has left ()
542 2012-10-21 11:44:19 sudog has joined
543 2012-10-21 11:48:05 <slush1> Can anybody send me few testnet bitcoins to miWqkZQ1nLaEKtahPcqXWjNn2GzYbruvqX ?
544 2012-10-21 11:48:18 <slush1> Faucet looks broken and I need something to test.
545 2012-10-21 11:48:35 <Diablo-D3> heh its a slush
546 2012-10-21 11:49:40 <slush1> Diablo-D3: heh, so? :)
547 2012-10-21 11:49:54 <Diablo-D3> dont see you on irc much anymore
548 2012-10-21 11:52:29 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
549 2012-10-21 11:55:35 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
550 2012-10-21 11:57:07 <slush1> Diablo-D3: I'm here most of the time, but not talking in -dev too much
551 2012-10-21 11:58:05 <slush1> nobody with at least few testnet coins here? :(
552 2012-10-21 11:58:25 <Diablo-D3> not me
553 2012-10-21 11:59:37 <senseless> i got a block on my test net wallet if testnet hasnt been regenisesed since then
554 2012-10-21 11:59:45 <senseless> give me a bit and ill load it up
555 2012-10-21 12:00:49 <slush1> oh, nevermind, I just found one lost wallet with 120700 tesnet coins O:-)
556 2012-10-21 12:01:02 <Diablo-D3> >lost
557 2012-10-21 12:01:03 <Diablo-D3> wat?
558 2012-10-21 12:01:09 <senseless> slush1: e770b26259d9a045ff05a6347f392b8eb6e9cb65bcb7164f06425868ad04d254
559 2012-10-21 12:01:15 <slush1> senseless: thanks :)
560 2012-10-21 12:01:24 <slush1> Diablo-D3: found on old development machine
561 2012-10-21 12:01:32 <Diablo-D3> >lost machine
562 2012-10-21 12:01:33 <Diablo-D3> wat?
563 2012-10-21 12:02:00 <Diablo-D3> what is this, the bash quote about losing a machine, but it still reponds to pings, you just dont know exactly where it is?
564 2012-10-21 12:02:42 <slush1> hehe, I don't understand you
565 2012-10-21 12:02:50 <slush1> I simply found one wallet.dat with few coins
566 2012-10-21 12:03:18 <MC1984> atlas is a twat
567 2012-10-21 12:03:23 <Diablo-D3> http://www.bash.org/?5273
568 2012-10-21 12:03:32 <MC1984> also that guy strata seems like a nob
569 2012-10-21 12:03:39 <slush1> Diablo-D3: lol
570 2012-10-21 12:03:49 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: Achievement Unlocked: MASTER OF THE OBVIOUS
571 2012-10-21 12:05:01 dvide has quit ()
572 2012-10-21 12:05:01 <MC1984> why cant they just start banning fools
573 2012-10-21 12:05:18 <Diablo-D3> because theymos wont let me :<
574 2012-10-21 12:05:19 <MC1984> forums are forums, someone runs it and its not a free speech zone
575 2012-10-21 12:05:54 <MC1984> i think those forums are a detriment to bitcoin right now
576 2012-10-21 12:05:57 <senseless> because they believe in liberty and free speech, which to them means they can come shit in your living room because "it's their right"
577 2012-10-21 12:06:13 <Diablo-D3> yes, and I can also shoot them because its my right.
578 2012-10-21 12:06:15 dvide has joined
579 2012-10-21 12:06:24 <Diablo-D3> also, my living room doubles as a private armory.
580 2012-10-21 12:06:32 <senseless> I just mean, if they get banned people will start pouting and whining like girls :/
581 2012-10-21 12:06:50 <Diablo-D3> you know what happens to girls that pout and whine?
582 2012-10-21 12:07:08 <Diablo-D3> hint: resistance only makes my dick harder.
583 2012-10-21 12:07:13 <senseless> they end up single with 50 cats?
584 2012-10-21 12:07:15 <senseless> im not sure
585 2012-10-21 12:07:46 <MC1984> the sad thing is it would be great to have people checking the dev team and shit, but that guy makes it look like an errand for asshats
586 2012-10-21 12:08:04 * Diablo-D3 goes back to working on Seaking
587 2012-10-21 12:08:56 <MC1984> diablo implies he frequently rapes intrasigent women into submission
588 2012-10-21 12:09:15 <MC1984> in the context of the forum bitches, i support this initiative
589 2012-10-21 12:09:38 <Diablo-D3> I wonder if I can buy condoms in bulk on amazon
590 2012-10-21 12:10:06 <MC1984> fucking atlas didactic asshole
591 2012-10-21 12:10:10 <Diablo-D3> http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/FBI-must-pay-S-F-journalist-470-000-3965054.php
592 2012-10-21 12:10:11 <MC1984> fffffffffffffffffffffff
593 2012-10-21 12:10:30 * Diablo-D3 puts his stamp of approval on this
594 2012-10-21 12:10:50 <Diablo-D3> raping the fbi in court? sounds like my kind of party.
595 2012-10-21 12:11:18 <MC1984> keep laughing, thats your money
596 2012-10-21 12:11:42 <Diablo-D3> what money?
597 2012-10-21 12:11:53 <Diablo-D3> its all fake money that doesnt exist
598 2012-10-21 12:12:12 <MC1984> still your fake money
599 2012-10-21 12:12:17 <Diablo-D3> what money?
600 2012-10-21 12:12:24 <Diablo-D3> seriously, Im like the poorest person in here
601 2012-10-21 12:12:28 <MC1984> id pay any fine with someone elses magic money too
602 2012-10-21 12:12:46 mmoya has joined
603 2012-10-21 12:12:54 <MC1984> also observe as the FBI receives a tip off about CP on that guys computer a couple of years from now
604 2012-10-21 12:14:29 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
605 2012-10-21 12:14:41 <slush1> I still don't understand why testnet difficulty is different than nbits
606 2012-10-21 12:14:51 <sipa> slush1: it is not
607 2012-10-21 12:15:05 <sipa> the rules for calculating difficulty/nbits are just different
608 2012-10-21 12:15:08 <slush1> When I calculate target from nbits, it is much higher than 1 given in getinfo difficulty
609 2012-10-21 12:15:11 <slush1> oh
610 2012-10-21 12:15:20 <MC1984> oh wow is ultraprune stuff officially in the mainline now?
611 2012-10-21 12:15:31 <sipa> MC1984: yup
612 2012-10-21 12:15:43 <MC1984> you magnificent bastard
613 2012-10-21 12:15:51 <slush1> sipa: btw congratulation for this. I really like you development in this area
614 2012-10-21 12:15:59 <sipa> slush1: thanks :)
615 2012-10-21 12:16:51 <slush1> sipa: btw where are these different rules for nbits described?
616 2012-10-21 12:17:13 <sipa> slush1: good question - iḿ afraid only in the source code
617 2012-10-21 12:17:27 <slush1> quite typical ;)
618 2012-10-21 12:18:52 <sipa> the informal rule is "when the time different with the parent block is more than 20 minutes, difficulty is 1; blocks afterwards resume the normal difficulty of the 2016-block-range they are in"
619 2012-10-21 12:19:25 <sipa> but there are weird (and unintended) interactions when the transition block has a 20 minute delay itself
620 2012-10-21 12:19:50 <slush1> oh, so nbits is still the same and these alternate rules apply only to difficulty?
621 2012-10-21 12:20:37 <sipa> yes
622 2012-10-21 12:21:06 <sipa> but nbits will reflect the difficulty 1
623 2012-10-21 12:21:13 <slush1> hm, skipped target checking, but I'm still unable to generate testnet block
624 2012-10-21 12:21:41 leotreasure has joined
625 2012-10-21 12:21:50 asuk has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
626 2012-10-21 12:22:05 asuk has joined
627 2012-10-21 12:26:26 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
628 2012-10-21 12:26:47 leotreasure has joined
629 2012-10-21 12:29:15 Rv has joined
630 2012-10-21 12:29:38 Rv is now known as Guest72066
631 2012-10-21 12:30:58 leotreasure_ has joined
632 2012-10-21 12:31:10 <MC1984> where can i get mainline builds
633 2012-10-21 12:31:23 <MC1984> is there such a thing
634 2012-10-21 12:31:47 <sipa> you mean releases?
635 2012-10-21 12:32:05 <MC1984> test builds
636 2012-10-21 12:32:10 <sipa> we don't have daily builds of mainline
637 2012-10-21 12:32:13 <MC1984> like yours
638 2012-10-21 12:32:27 <sipa> but BlueMatt's pull tester creates builds for every pull request
639 2012-10-21 12:32:53 <MC1984> whats the plan for testing ultraprune then
640 2012-10-21 12:33:29 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
641 2012-10-21 12:33:34 <sipa> daily builds would be nice, i suppose
642 2012-10-21 12:33:55 <sipa> for now, testing has relied on people building themselves, until release candidates are there
643 2012-10-21 12:35:18 leotreasure_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
644 2012-10-21 12:35:23 <sipa> and there is Luke-Jr's next-test builds
645 2012-10-21 12:36:31 <MC1984> i wanted to continue to test
646 2012-10-21 12:36:49 <MC1984> but im a pleb, i cant compile programs
647 2012-10-21 12:37:43 leotreasure has joined
648 2012-10-21 12:41:09 RazielZ has joined
649 2012-10-21 12:49:08 slothbag has joined
650 2012-10-21 12:51:41 sudog has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
651 2012-10-21 12:52:48 slothbag has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
652 2012-10-21 13:02:53 Joric has joined
653 2012-10-21 13:03:19 <Joric> someone made a front page! http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/11u55q/jgarzik_my_bitcoin_balance_disappeared_post/
654 2012-10-21 13:06:31 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
655 2012-10-21 13:07:47 leotreasure has joined
656 2012-10-21 13:10:54 bladezor has joined
657 2012-10-21 13:11:49 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
658 2012-10-21 13:12:25 leotreasure has joined
659 2012-10-21 13:13:40 sudog has joined
660 2012-10-21 13:14:38 asuk has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
661 2012-10-21 13:14:55 asuk has joined
662 2012-10-21 13:17:02 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
663 2012-10-21 13:17:09 Cory has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
664 2012-10-21 13:17:45 leotreasure has joined
665 2012-10-21 13:21:39 aurigae1 has joined
666 2012-10-21 13:25:46 <sipa> jgarzik, gmaxwell: bug found
667 2012-10-21 13:34:11 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
668 2012-10-21 13:37:00 leotreasure has joined
669 2012-10-21 13:38:33 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
670 2012-10-21 13:41:09 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
671 2012-10-21 13:41:38 leotreasure has joined
672 2012-10-21 13:42:18 D34TH has joined
673 2012-10-21 13:42:18 D34TH has quit (Changing host)
674 2012-10-21 13:42:18 D34TH has joined
675 2012-10-21 13:42:22 conman has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
676 2012-10-21 13:43:38 mmoya has joined
677 2012-10-21 13:45:47 leotreasure_ has joined
678 2012-10-21 13:46:17 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
679 2012-10-21 13:48:34 Diapolo has joined
680 2012-10-21 13:49:53 leotreasure_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
681 2012-10-21 13:50:42 leotreasure has joined
682 2012-10-21 13:55:20 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
683 2012-10-21 13:55:57 leotreasure has joined
684 2012-10-21 13:56:21 benehsv has joined
685 2012-10-21 13:58:30 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: IMO what might make GBT simpler to implement in miners would be to require coinbasetxn ;)
686 2012-10-21 13:58:57 TheEslbear has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
687 2012-10-21 13:59:16 TheEslbear has joined
688 2012-10-21 13:59:57 <Diapolo> Seems I'm currently not able to compile with Ultraprune directly on Windows. I get a:
689 2012-10-21 13:59:57 <Diapolo> mingw32-make[1]: Entering directory `C:/Users/Diapolo/bitcoin.Qt' cd C:/Users/Diapolo/bitcoin.Qt/src/leveldb; CC=gcc CXX=g++ TARGET_OS=OS_WINDOWS_CROSSCOMPILE CXXFLAGS=-I LDFLAGS=-L D:/MinGW/bin/mingw32-make libleveldb.a libmemenv.a; ranlib C:/Users/Diapolo/bitcoin.Qt/src/leveldb/libleveldb.a; ranlib C:/Users/Diapolo/bitcoin.Qt/src/leveldb/libmemenv.a The filename or extension is too long.
690 2012-10-21 14:00:27 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
691 2012-10-21 14:01:09 bladezor has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
692 2012-10-21 14:03:16 leotreasure has joined
693 2012-10-21 14:06:16 <sipa> Diapolo: try building leveldb separately beforehand
694 2012-10-21 14:06:26 <sipa> Diapolo: just go into the subdirectory, and make there
695 2012-10-21 14:06:30 sirk390 has joined
696 2012-10-21 14:07:24 Zarutian has joined
697 2012-10-21 14:07:36 <Diapolo> sipa: just mingw32-make in leveldb folder?
698 2012-10-21 14:07:58 <sipa> yes
699 2012-10-21 14:08:06 <sipa> oh, no
700 2012-10-21 14:08:12 <sipa> make libleveldb.a libmemenv.a
701 2012-10-21 14:09:25 <Diapolo> I never used make, not even sure if this is part of mingw ;) will try, just a sec.
702 2012-10-21 14:10:08 <Diapolo> no, there is no make
703 2012-10-21 14:10:18 benehsv has left ()
704 2012-10-21 14:10:19 <sipa> oh, mingw32-make in your case
705 2012-10-21 14:10:36 <sipa> i just mean you need to build libleveldb.a and libmemenv.a, not the default targets
706 2012-10-21 14:11:39 <Diapolo> C:\Users\Diapolo\bitcoin.Qt\src\leveldb>mingw32-make libleveldb.a libmemenv.a leads to:
707 2012-10-21 14:11:57 <Diapolo> process_begin: CreateProcess(NULL, sh C:\Users\Diapolo\bitcoin.Qt\src\leveldb\build_detect_platform build_config.mk, ...) failed.
708 2012-10-21 14:11:57 <Diapolo> Makefile:20: build_config.mk: No such file or directory
709 2012-10-21 14:11:57 <Diapolo> mingw32-make: *** No rule to make target `build_config.mk'. Stop.
710 2012-10-21 14:13:00 <sipa> no clue about that - sorry
711 2012-10-21 14:13:00 sgstair has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
712 2012-10-21 14:13:13 <D34TH> hold on ill try
713 2012-10-21 14:13:13 <sipa> the win32 leveldb port was contributed by justmoon
714 2012-10-21 14:13:27 sgstair has joined
715 2012-10-21 14:13:29 <D34TH> link?
716 2012-10-21 14:13:33 <Diapolo> That's why I asked if anyone compiled it on windows :D.
717 2012-10-21 14:13:41 <D34TH> or is it in head
718 2012-10-21 14:13:45 <sipa> D34TH: HEAD
719 2012-10-21 14:13:58 <sipa> Diapolo: well i did builds for windows, not on windows
720 2012-10-21 14:14:40 <D34TH> made
721 2012-10-21 14:14:43 <D34TH> just fine
722 2012-10-21 14:14:44 <Diapolo> that's the difference it seems ... any idea how this can be run ob Windows?
723 2012-10-21 14:14:44 <Diapolo> $(shell ./build_detect_platform build_config.mk) it seems I need to create that build_config.mk file
724 2012-10-21 14:14:51 <D34TH> "Unknown" platform
725 2012-10-21 14:15:11 <Diapolo> D34TH: How did you proceed?
726 2012-10-21 14:15:49 <D34TH> v
727 2012-10-21 14:15:50 <D34TH> http://pastebin.com/s0YYNChh
728 2012-10-21 14:16:29 <Diapolo> build_detect_platform is a shell script I dunno how that would work on Windows
729 2012-10-21 14:16:38 <D34TH> i have sh
730 2012-10-21 14:16:42 <sipa> well you need a shell obviously
731 2012-10-21 14:16:42 <D34TH> notice my use of ls
732 2012-10-21 14:16:48 <D34TH> MSYS
733 2012-10-21 14:17:19 <Diapolo> I never use this ... is this the MinGW Shell link in start menu?
734 2012-10-21 14:17:34 <sipa> did bitcoin even build before, without a shell?
735 2012-10-21 14:17:48 <Diapolo> Bitcoin-Qt build just fine, yes I never compiled just bitcoind
736 2012-10-21 14:18:04 <sipa> how was build.h generated, for example?
737 2012-10-21 14:18:06 <Diapolo> I have a shell but it's the Windows command-prompt :D
738 2012-10-21 14:18:13 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
739 2012-10-21 14:18:27 <sipa> ah, that has a !windows in the bitcoin-qt.pro file
740 2012-10-21 14:18:32 <Diapolo> build.h was not build
741 2012-10-21 14:18:35 <Diapolo> yes
742 2012-10-21 14:18:36 D34TH has joined
743 2012-10-21 14:18:48 <D34TH> i did run into an issue though compiling bitcoind
744 2012-10-21 14:19:04 <D34TH> makefile.mingw:98: *** missing separator. Stop.
745 2012-10-21 14:19:37 <sipa> oh, that's an actual bug
746 2012-10-21 14:19:46 <sipa> just change those 4 spaces into a tab
747 2012-10-21 14:20:03 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
748 2012-10-21 14:20:07 sirk390 has left ()
749 2012-10-21 14:20:10 <D34TH> yeay boost-1.5
750 2012-10-21 14:20:15 Joric has quit ()
751 2012-10-21 14:21:20 leotreasure has joined
752 2012-10-21 14:21:25 <Diapolo> how can I supply the platform with make?
753 2012-10-21 14:21:41 <Diapolo> $ make
754 2012-10-21 14:21:41 <Diapolo> Unknown platform!
755 2012-10-21 14:21:42 <Diapolo> rm -f libleveldb.a
756 2012-10-21 14:21:42 <Diapolo> ar -rs libleveldb.a
757 2012-10-21 14:21:42 <Diapolo> D:\MinGW\bin\ar.exe: creating libleveldb.a
758 2012-10-21 14:21:48 <D34TH> the file is made
759 2012-10-21 14:22:48 <sipa> now type
760 2012-10-21 14:22:53 <sipa> make libmemenv.a
761 2012-10-21 14:23:47 <Diapolo> I now have these 2 files, but they are just 8 Bytes in size?
762 2012-10-21 14:23:47 <D34TH> i would assume TARGET_OS=OS_WINDOWS_CROSSCOMPILE make
763 2012-10-21 14:24:29 <Diapolo> that's it, it seems to build now
764 2012-10-21 14:24:42 <D34TH> :3
765 2012-10-21 14:25:08 <Diapolo> damn, now the paths to boost are missing -_-
766 2012-10-21 14:25:14 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
767 2012-10-21 14:25:17 <D34TH> because it doesnt ask for a version
768 2012-10-21 14:25:20 <D34TH> specify your version
769 2012-10-21 14:25:23 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
770 2012-10-21 14:25:51 <sipa> feel free to submit a pullreq to simplify this process
771 2012-10-21 14:26:11 leotreasure has joined
772 2012-10-21 14:26:28 <Diapolo> how can I specify my version?
773 2012-10-21 14:30:27 leotreasure_ has joined
774 2012-10-21 14:30:29 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
775 2012-10-21 14:30:37 <D34TH> i prefer editing the makefile
776 2012-10-21 14:30:40 <D34TH> line 120
777 2012-10-21 14:30:48 <D34TH> **119
778 2012-10-21 14:32:16 <Diapolo> I see in build_detect_platform you mean
779 2012-10-21 14:32:30 <D34TH> yea
780 2012-10-21 14:32:32 <D34TH> whoops
781 2012-10-21 14:33:14 <D34TH> http://pastebin.com/SxnSpnzR
782 2012-10-21 14:33:18 <D34TH> im at that right now
783 2012-10-21 14:34:54 <sipa> you don't need to build the .so file
784 2012-10-21 14:35:11 leotreasure_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
785 2012-10-21 14:35:13 <sipa> (still shouldn't fail, though0
786 2012-10-21 14:35:39 leotreasure has joined
787 2012-10-21 14:36:02 <D34TH> i make the .a's fine
788 2012-10-21 14:36:23 <sipa> libleveldb.a and libmemenv.a is all you need
789 2012-10-21 14:36:33 <D34TH> i dont have a leveldb/libleveldb.lib for bitcoind
790 2012-10-21 14:36:42 <Diapolo> BOOST chrono seems missing
791 2012-10-21 14:36:49 <D34TH> yea i added it
792 2012-10-21 14:36:51 <D34TH> want my changed makefile
793 2012-10-21 14:37:00 Insti has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
794 2012-10-21 14:37:01 <sipa> D34TH: please submit a pullreq :)
795 2012-10-21 14:37:13 <D34TH> sipa after i specify its own case
796 2012-10-21 14:37:17 <D34TH> of NATIVE_WINDOWS
797 2012-10-21 14:37:30 <D34TH> instead of borking crosscompile
798 2012-10-21 14:37:33 <sipa> ok
799 2012-10-21 14:37:36 <Diapolo> good idea for a patch :)
800 2012-10-21 14:37:59 <Diapolo> yes now it's working
801 2012-10-21 14:38:01 <sipa> hmm, what is that .lib file?
802 2012-10-21 14:38:26 <D34TH> mingw32-make: *** No rule to make target 'leveldb/libleveldb.lib', needed by 'ob
803 2012-10-21 14:38:26 <D34TH> j/leveldb.o'. Stop.
804 2012-10-21 14:38:30 <Diapolo> build_detect_platform line 119:
805 2012-10-21 14:38:30 <Diapolo> PLATFORM_EXTRALIBS="-lboost_system-mgw47-mt-s-1_51 -lboost_filesystem-mgw47-mt-s-1_51 -lboost_thread-mgw47-mt-s-1_51 -lboost_chrono-mgw47-mt-s-1_51"
806 2012-10-21 14:38:53 one_zero has quit ()
807 2012-10-21 14:39:17 <D34TH> Diapolo i was going to specify the libs found in makefile.mingw
808 2012-10-21 14:39:49 <Diapolo> since boost 1.5 the thread lib needs chrono on Windows
809 2012-10-21 14:40:06 <Diapolo> you can create your pull and I'll be glad to comment and test it out :)
810 2012-10-21 14:40:29 <sipa> you may want to talk to justmoon, as he contributed it
811 2012-10-21 14:40:35 <sipa> (and maybe i screwed it up)
812 2012-10-21 14:41:46 <Diapolo> Well Qt-Creator still doesn't fine libleveldb.a but it's there ... hmm
813 2012-10-21 14:42:09 <D34TH> i could tell you why
814 2012-10-21 14:42:19 <D34TH> are you using your mingw or qt-creators mingw
815 2012-10-21 14:42:34 <D34TH> if you `dont know` you have 2 mingws
816 2012-10-21 14:43:38 aurigae1 has left ()
817 2012-10-21 14:43:45 <Diapolo> not the included one
818 2012-10-21 14:44:01 <Diapolo> upgraded to mingw 4.7.1 and compiled the Qt stuff for myself with that
819 2012-10-21 14:44:35 <D34TH> ahh
820 2012-10-21 14:45:38 leotreasure has quit (Quit: leotreasure)
821 2012-10-21 14:46:45 <D34TH> proposing file change
822 2012-10-21 14:47:26 <D34TH> stupid litecoin screwed up my push
823 2012-10-21 14:47:58 <Diapolo> sipa: When I have the 2 .a files in leveldb, is there anything more to be done or do I just need to link to them / use them?
824 2012-10-21 14:48:41 <sipa> just that
825 2012-10-21 14:49:02 <sipa> though i wonder why the makefile refers to libleveldb.lib
826 2012-10-21 14:49:13 sirk3901 has joined
827 2012-10-21 14:49:56 <Diapolo> .lib is not MinGW that's MS VC++ no?
828 2012-10-21 14:50:00 <D34TH> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1940
829 2012-10-21 14:50:37 <D34TH> line 99: makefile.mingw
830 2012-10-21 14:50:42 <Diapolo> it seems to build Bitcoin-Qt now, I removed all that magic except:
831 2012-10-21 14:50:42 <Diapolo> INCLUDEPATH += src/leveldb/include src/leveldb/helpersLIBS += $$PWD/src/leveldb/libleveldb.a $$PWD/src/leveldb/libmemenv.a
832 2012-10-21 14:50:43 <D34TH> thats probably why
833 2012-10-21 14:50:48 <sipa> D34TH: do you have to refer to specific boost versions?
834 2012-10-21 14:51:08 <D34TH> i dont believe windows boost compiles general versions
835 2012-10-21 14:51:11 <D34TH> but no you shouldnt
836 2012-10-21 14:52:54 <Diapolo> somehow the boost version should be supplyable via the shell or we need to supply the version we require for Windows anyway, which is MinGW 4.4 with Boost 1.50 currently AFAIK.
837 2012-10-21 14:53:32 <D34TH> ahh, in the makefile.mingw it says 4.5
838 2012-10-21 14:53:38 maaku has joined
839 2012-10-21 14:54:02 ThomasV has joined
840 2012-10-21 14:54:09 asuk has joined
841 2012-10-21 14:55:32 Insti has joined
842 2012-10-21 14:55:39 <Diapolo> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/bitcoin-qt.pro#L319
843 2012-10-21 14:56:09 sirk3901 has left ()
844 2012-10-21 14:56:27 <D34TH> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/makefile.mingw#L19
845 2012-10-21 14:56:38 asuk has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
846 2012-10-21 14:57:01 <sipa> ah, we already do it seems
847 2012-10-21 14:57:02 <sipa> meh
848 2012-10-21 14:57:45 <Diapolo> D34TH: strange makes no sense to use 2 different hard-coded MinGW version references IMO.
849 2012-10-21 14:58:09 * D34TH points slowly
850 2012-10-21 14:58:25 <D34TH> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/a1755ec4264248323f9a38ac0c3f19200b77c9f8#src/makefile.mingw
851 2012-10-21 14:59:07 <Diapolo> I have no idea, why 4.5 is mentioned there ^^.
852 2012-10-21 15:00:00 <Diapolo> sipa: I have to warnings left when compiling Bitcoin-Qt now
853 2012-10-21 15:00:15 <Diapolo> C:\Users\Diapolo\bitcoin.Qt\src\init.cpp:83: Warnung:deleting object of polymorphic class type 'CCoinsViewCache' which has non-virtual destructor might cause undefined behaviour [-Wdelete-non-virtual-dtor]
854 2012-10-21 15:00:24 <Diapolo> and C:\Users\Diapolo\bitcoin.Qt\src\init.cpp:84: Warnung:deleting object of polymorphic class type 'CCoinsViewDB' which has non-virtual destructor might cause undefined behaviour [-Wdelete-non-virtual-dtor]
855 2012-10-21 15:00:26 <sipa> interesting
856 2012-10-21 15:01:08 <Diapolo> and Bitcoin-Qt is crashing with only wallet.dat and bitcoin.conf in the folder I need to investigate this a little
857 2012-10-21 15:01:15 <sipa> :o
858 2012-10-21 15:03:15 DerCoin has joined
859 2012-10-21 15:04:56 <D34TH> i hate libdb
860 2012-10-21 15:05:16 <sipa> haha
861 2012-10-21 15:07:23 <D34TH> http://pastebin.com/ktpt27mV
862 2012-10-21 15:07:50 <D34TH> if you go down past the txdb and leveldb youll see my hatred
863 2012-10-21 15:08:06 <D34TH> Diapolo, you should send me your libdb's
864 2012-10-21 15:09:25 <Diapolo> the .a's?
865 2012-10-21 15:09:32 <D34TH> yea
866 2012-10-21 15:10:29 <Diapolo> I'll zip and up them, just a sec.
867 2012-10-21 15:13:36 <Diapolo> http://wikisend.com/download/622246/leveldb.zip
868 2012-10-21 15:13:40 <Diapolo> there you go
869 2012-10-21 15:13:45 <D34TH> thnx
870 2012-10-21 15:14:10 <D34TH> nonono, libdb not libleveldb
871 2012-10-21 15:14:38 <D34TH> libdb.a, libdb_cxx.a
872 2012-10-21 15:16:57 <Diapolo> ah sorry ...
873 2012-10-21 15:17:07 <D34TH> ill just try compiling it
874 2012-10-21 15:18:09 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
875 2012-10-21 15:18:13 sirk390 has joined
876 2012-10-21 15:18:24 <Diapolo> that was not easy I remember ^^
877 2012-10-21 15:18:37 <Diapolo> http://wikisend.com/download/287114/libdb.zip
878 2012-10-21 15:18:53 <D34TH> <3
879 2012-10-21 15:19:27 * sipa hopes to get rid of the bdb dependency soon
880 2012-10-21 15:19:41 Aexoden has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.7-dev)
881 2012-10-21 15:19:49 <D34TH> still getting that stupid db error
882 2012-10-21 15:19:50 <D34TH> D:
883 2012-10-21 15:20:33 <Diapolo> sipa: could the posted warnings above cause a hard crash with Bitcoin-Qt?
884 2012-10-21 15:20:39 Aexoden has joined
885 2012-10-21 15:20:50 Tactalneck has joined
886 2012-10-21 15:20:56 <Diapolo> well I guess no as they are in Shutdown() ^^ sorry
887 2012-10-21 15:22:36 <D34TH> renaming libdb to libfubar
888 2012-10-21 15:23:27 <Diablo-D3> heh
889 2012-10-21 15:27:21 Tactalneck has quit (Quit: Tactalneck)
890 2012-10-21 15:27:42 <Diapolo> sipa: still crashes ... will try with a clean datadir
891 2012-10-21 15:28:16 <D34TH> oh wow
892 2012-10-21 15:28:20 <D34TH> i feel stupid
893 2012-10-21 15:28:31 Tactalneck has joined
894 2012-10-21 15:28:53 <D34TH> that fixed most of my issues
895 2012-10-21 15:28:56 <D34TH> LOL
896 2012-10-21 15:29:32 Tactalneck has quit (Client Quit)
897 2012-10-21 15:29:46 <Diapolo> D34TH: do you build bitcoind or Bitcoin-Qt currently?
898 2012-10-21 15:29:53 <D34TH> attempting to do qt
899 2012-10-21 15:29:57 Tactalneck has joined
900 2012-10-21 15:30:10 rdponticelli has joined
901 2012-10-21 15:30:17 xisalty has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
902 2012-10-21 15:30:49 Tactalneck has quit (Client Quit)
903 2012-10-21 15:31:10 Tactalneck has joined
904 2012-10-21 15:31:32 <Diapolo> good will be interesting to see if it's working for you then
905 2012-10-21 15:34:57 <sipa> Diapolo: anything in debug.log when it crashes?
906 2012-10-21 15:38:01 Cory has joined
907 2012-10-21 15:47:11 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
908 2012-10-21 15:47:13 <Diapolo> sipa: nothing unusal and that is what bothers me...
909 2012-10-21 15:47:31 <Diapolo> these are the last 4 lines before the crash:
910 2012-10-21 15:47:32 <Diapolo> 10/21/12 15:17:16 ThreadDNSAddressSeed started
911 2012-10-21 15:47:32 <Diapolo> 10/21/12 15:17:16 0 addresses found from DNS seeds
912 2012-10-21 15:47:32 <Diapolo> 10/21/12 15:17:16 ThreadDNSAddressSeed exited
913 2012-10-21 15:47:32 <Diapolo> 10/21/12 15:17:16 ThreadOpenConnections started
914 2012-10-21 15:49:35 freakazoid has joined
915 2012-10-21 15:54:22 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
916 2012-10-21 15:57:57 <D34TH> having some leveldb errors
917 2012-10-21 16:01:29 freakazoid has joined
918 2012-10-21 16:01:41 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
919 2012-10-21 16:03:35 <D34TH> still getting libleveldb errors
920 2012-10-21 16:04:39 Guest72066 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
921 2012-10-21 16:04:39 <Diapolo> which ones?
922 2012-10-21 16:05:14 <D34TH> oh wiat
923 2012-10-21 16:05:18 <D34TH> just got past them
924 2012-10-21 16:05:29 <D34TH> why are your leveldb.a's so much larger
925 2012-10-21 16:07:17 <Diapolo> I'm asking myself if it is intended that leveldb is compiled with -O3 -march=native -mtune=native or if that comes from my env.
926 2012-10-21 16:07:46 <Diapolo> oh I set this as env-flag ^^
927 2012-10-21 16:07:57 <D34TH> built
928 2012-10-21 16:08:20 <D34TH> and error
929 2012-10-21 16:08:23 <D34TH> whoot
930 2012-10-21 16:09:12 <D34TH> and now it insta crashes
931 2012-10-21 16:09:54 <fiesh> march implies mtune...
932 2012-10-21 16:11:23 JZavala has joined
933 2012-10-21 16:11:30 <D34TH> still different
934 2012-10-21 16:11:39 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
935 2012-10-21 16:12:21 <Diapolo> D34HT: it built bitcoin-qt.exe and crashes on startup?
936 2012-10-21 16:12:21 <D34TH> yep
937 2012-10-21 16:12:24 <Diapolo> same here
938 2012-10-21 16:12:42 <Diapolo> I see the splash screen and before the GUI shows up it crashes hard
939 2012-10-21 16:13:00 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
940 2012-10-21 16:13:03 <D34TH> i dont even see splash
941 2012-10-21 16:13:16 <Diapolo> strange ... what's in debug.log
942 2012-10-21 16:13:38 copumpkin has joined
943 2012-10-21 16:13:45 <D34TH> doesnt get that far
944 2012-10-21 16:14:15 <D34TH> immediate werfault
945 2012-10-21 16:14:25 TD has joined
946 2012-10-21 16:15:01 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
947 2012-10-21 16:15:20 <D34TH> bitcoind compiled and is running just fine
948 2012-10-21 16:15:35 <D34TH> must be gay QT
949 2012-10-21 16:15:40 <Diapolo> now that is strange ...
950 2012-10-21 16:16:14 <Diapolo> so at least the leveldb libs seem to be okay then?
951 2012-10-21 16:16:27 <D34TH> yes
952 2012-10-21 16:17:44 <Diapolo> the last thing I see with my Bitcoin-Qt is "Loading wallet..."
953 2012-10-21 16:18:39 <Diapolo> crashes with QtGui4.dll
954 2012-10-21 16:18:57 <D34TH> put the 2 dll's in the folder
955 2012-10-21 16:19:18 <Diapolo> no no I was able to built Bitcoin-Qt just fine before the Ultraprune patch
956 2012-10-21 16:23:18 <D34TH> sipa: if leveldb can be used for transaction db why not wallet
957 2012-10-21 16:25:15 <Diapolo> hey wow now it's starting ...
958 2012-10-21 16:25:33 <sipa> D34TH: mainly the fact that it is overkill, and requires an entire directory for storage instead of just a file
959 2012-10-21 16:25:58 <D34TH> Diapolo, what id you do
960 2012-10-21 16:26:11 <Diapolo> sipa: I moved NewThread(ThreadImport, vPath); in init.cpp into the if-clause ... and it starts could there be some problem with the -loadblock Thread?
961 2012-10-21 16:27:06 <sipa> Diapolo: if you do that, you disable the bootstrap.dat ability
962 2012-10-21 16:27:23 <D34TH> add -bootstrap?
963 2012-10-21 16:27:24 <Diapolo> right. but if I don't use it why should it spawn a thread
964 2012-10-21 16:27:42 Tactalneck has quit (Quit: ThrashIRC v2.8 sic populo comunicated)
965 2012-10-21 16:27:47 <sipa> D34TH: what's the point of that? then we could just use -loadblock
966 2012-10-21 16:27:52 <sipa> Diapolo: "meh"
967 2012-10-21 16:28:39 <Diapolo> sorry? I'm rather sure this causes my crash:
968 2012-10-21 16:28:39 <Diapolo> std::vector<boost::filesystem::path> *vPath = new std::vector<boost::filesystem::path>();
969 2012-10-21 16:28:39 <Diapolo> NewThread(ThreadImport, vPath);
970 2012-10-21 16:28:53 <sipa> why would it?
971 2012-10-21 16:29:10 <sipa> show me the bug, and I'll believe you, but in that code alone is no problem
972 2012-10-21 16:29:11 <Luke-Jr> O.o
973 2012-10-21 16:29:19 <sipa> maybe there is a bug in ThreadImport, though
974 2012-10-21 16:29:25 <Luke-Jr> well, it doesn't make sense either :P
975 2012-10-21 16:29:53 denisx has joined
976 2012-10-21 16:30:30 <Diapolo> sipa: that was what I thought, too ... a bug in ThreadImport
977 2012-10-21 16:30:52 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
978 2012-10-21 16:30:58 <D34TH> quick find and murder
979 2012-10-21 16:31:02 <D34TH> ill get the raid
980 2012-10-21 16:31:38 <Luke-Jr> (reading the full code does make sense tho)
981 2012-10-21 16:31:39 <D34TH> mine still faults immediatly
982 2012-10-21 16:31:48 <D34TH> its gotta be my QT
983 2012-10-21 16:32:23 <Diapolo> if vPath does not contain any file, can this cause a crash?
984 2012-10-21 16:33:01 <sipa> Luke-Jr: ThreadImport should move to init.cpp, with the import loop code in a function in main.cpp
985 2012-10-21 16:33:08 <sipa> that would make things clearer as well
986 2012-10-21 16:33:17 <sipa> Diapolo: it shouldn't
987 2012-10-21 16:34:48 wizkid057 has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
988 2012-10-21 16:34:58 <Diapolo> I verified it, when I comment-out NewThread(ThreadImport, vPath); Bitcoin-Qt does NOT crash.
989 2012-10-21 16:35:34 Joric has joined
990 2012-10-21 16:35:38 <sipa> ok, add some print statements inside of ThreadImport then, and localize where the problem is
991 2012-10-21 16:35:46 <sipa> or run it in a debugger
992 2012-10-21 16:35:52 <sipa> and break in that function
993 2012-10-21 16:36:16 <Diapolo> sipa: I'll for sure investigate further, but at least my Qt Creator doesn't allow me to debug currently :-/.
994 2012-10-21 16:36:28 wizkid057 has joined
995 2012-10-21 16:36:29 <sipa> you don't have gdb?
996 2012-10-21 16:37:13 <sipa> anyway, adding debug output can function as a weak replacement of a debugger :)
997 2012-10-21 16:37:18 <Diapolo> I did not compile the recent Qt version as debug ^^
998 2012-10-21 16:37:30 freakazoid has joined
999 2012-10-21 16:38:22 <Luke-Jr> Diapolo: just ensure Bitcoin-Qt gets compiled with -ggdb -O0
1000 2012-10-21 16:38:28 <Luke-Jr> maybe install DrMingw
1001 2012-10-21 16:38:44 <Diapolo> never heard of that Luke
1002 2012-10-21 16:38:51 <Luke-Jr> tho Qt Creator might do everything DrMingw does itself
1003 2012-10-21 16:39:00 <Luke-Jr> DrMingw just displays crash info
1004 2012-10-21 16:39:13 <Diapolo> even that -ggdb -O0 flag is new to me ^^
1005 2012-10-21 16:39:47 <Luke-Jr> -ggdb = include extended gdb-compatible debugging information
1006 2012-10-21 16:39:53 <Luke-Jr> -O0 = don't optimize anything, period
1007 2012-10-21 16:39:59 <Luke-Jr> (optimizations can make debugging a pain)
1008 2012-10-21 16:40:01 <Diapolo> -O0 was clear
1009 2012-10-21 16:42:48 maaku has joined
1010 2012-10-21 16:43:24 toffoo has joined
1011 2012-10-21 16:44:35 <Diapolo> now that fix was easy ... it seems
1012 2012-10-21 16:44:49 Joric has quit ()
1013 2012-10-21 16:45:09 maaku has quit (Client Quit)
1014 2012-10-21 16:45:13 <Diapolo> if (!vFiles->empty()) {
1015 2012-10-21 16:45:13 <Diapolo> // -loadblock=
1016 2012-10-21 16:45:13 <Diapolo> ....
1017 2012-10-21 16:45:13 <Diapolo> }
1018 2012-10-21 16:45:47 <Luke-Jr> â¦
1019 2012-10-21 16:46:13 <sipa> Diapolo: you don't get it; even if vFiles is empty, bootstrap.dat should still be processed
1020 2012-10-21 16:46:17 <sipa> and that happens in that thread
1021 2012-10-21 16:46:26 <Diapolo> right and it happens after
1022 2012-10-21 16:46:49 <sipa> i don't get it
1023 2012-10-21 16:46:51 <Diapolo> first part manual -loadblock (for which this check is)
1024 2012-10-21 16:47:00 <sipa> and that helps? :S
1025 2012-10-21 16:47:02 <Diapolo> and second part is bootstrap
1026 2012-10-21 16:47:12 <Diapolo> which this check doesn't touch
1027 2012-10-21 16:47:27 <sipa> does it help?
1028 2012-10-21 16:47:49 <Diapolo> http://pastebin.de/30366
1029 2012-10-21 16:47:54 <Diapolo> it fixes the crash for me
1030 2012-10-21 16:48:07 <Luke-Jr> sipa: IMO there's definitely some fclose()s missing
1031 2012-10-21 16:48:16 <jgarzik> wakeup email, pass #1: delete all SF admin spam. pass #2: delete all Windows-related github emails. pass #3: actually read email
1032 2012-10-21 16:48:27 <sipa> even then, Diapolo's change doesn't make sense
1033 2012-10-21 16:48:33 <sipa> as in his case, no file is opened
1034 2012-10-21 16:48:40 <Luke-Jr> yes, unrelated to that I mean
1035 2012-10-21 16:48:59 <sipa> also, LoadExternalBlockFile closes itself
1036 2012-10-21 16:49:01 <Luke-Jr> Diapolo: what if you only comment out this line? uiInterface.InitMessage(_("Starting block importâ¦"));
1037 2012-10-21 16:49:10 <Luke-Jr> sipa: ew O.o
1038 2012-10-21 16:49:11 <sipa> as it uses CAutoFile which closes when going out of scope
1039 2012-10-21 16:49:18 <sipa> yeah, eww indeed
1040 2012-10-21 16:49:24 <jgarzik> sipa: will test your zero-balance fix later tonight
1041 2012-10-21 16:49:35 <jgarzik> sipa: I'm surprised you did not see this before :)
1042 2012-10-21 16:49:52 <sipa> jgarzik: well it requires importing from scratch with a full wallet
1043 2012-10-21 16:50:04 <jgarzik> sipa: which will be the normal upgrade case :)
1044 2012-10-21 16:50:13 <sipa> but i should have noticed, indeed
1045 2012-10-21 16:50:13 <Diapolo> Luke-Jr: I'll try
1046 2012-10-21 16:50:43 <jgarzik> RE fclose()... yeah it's annoying, passing FILE to CAutoFile()
1047 2012-10-21 16:50:58 <jgarzik> I would rather pass the FILE*, wait for the func to return, then close it
1048 2012-10-21 16:51:02 <jgarzik> or simply pass CAutoFile
1049 2012-10-21 16:51:04 <sipa> jgarzik: indeed
1050 2012-10-21 16:51:19 <Diapolo> Luke that's it ... seems the initMessage causes an error here
1051 2012-10-21 16:51:47 <sipa> Luke-Jr: why does your client turn ... into ⦠?
1052 2012-10-21 16:52:16 <sipa> i was already wondering whether the source code containing unicode could be Diapolo's issue
1053 2012-10-21 16:52:42 <Luke-Jr> sipa: âº
1054 2012-10-21 16:53:11 <sipa> Diapolo: if your remove the comment-out, it still crashes reproducibly?
1055 2012-10-21 16:53:47 <Luke-Jr> my theory is that InitMessage's QApplication::instance()->processEvents() can't be called from other threads
1056 2012-10-21 16:53:49 <Diapolo> sipa: commenting out uiInterface.InitMessage(_("Starting block import...")); -> no crash, leaving this in -> crash
1057 2012-10-21 16:54:32 asuk has joined
1058 2012-10-21 16:54:39 <sipa> hmm, ok
1059 2012-10-21 16:54:46 <sipa> makes it kind of useless, no?
1060 2012-10-21 16:54:49 <Diapolo> Luke-Jr: perhaps because it's not locked?
1061 2012-10-21 16:54:56 <Diapolo> multi-thread issue?
1062 2012-10-21 16:55:06 <Luke-Jr> sipa: no, up till now, it was only used from the init thread
1063 2012-10-21 16:55:20 <jgarzik> it might be nice to produce some unofficial ultraprune Windows test builds, for the testing crowd. maybe add an additional "this is really really really only a test version" additional popup messagebox at startup.
1064 2012-10-21 16:55:22 <Luke-Jr> sipa: it doesn't make sense to do it in ThreadImport IMO since the GUI is starting in parallel
1065 2012-10-21 16:56:04 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: I'll probably make a next build with it when the other pullreqs are rebased (for next-test)
1066 2012-10-21 16:56:09 <Diapolo> Luke-Jr: Could we just place a LOCK() for the initMessage?
1067 2012-10-21 16:56:24 <Luke-Jr> Diapolo: doubt it
1068 2012-10-21 16:56:25 <sipa> Diapolo: that doesn't make it run in another thread, does it?
1069 2012-10-21 16:56:47 <sipa> Luke-Jr: ok, the message can be moved to AppInit2, i guess
1070 2012-10-21 16:56:54 <Luke-Jr> isn't the point of ThreadImport so that it runs after the GUI is done loading basically?
1071 2012-10-21 16:57:14 <Luke-Jr> InitMessage only affects the splash screen *before* the GUI is loaded
1072 2012-10-21 16:57:16 <sipa> hmm, right - it already provides feedback anyway
1073 2012-10-21 16:57:22 <sipa> through the progressbar
1074 2012-10-21 16:57:24 <Luke-Jr> so it only makes sense to use it in the main init thread
1075 2012-10-21 16:57:33 <sipa> ok, just delete the uiInterface things
1076 2012-10-21 16:57:40 <sipa> in ThreadImport
1077 2012-10-21 16:57:52 <Diapolo> I will check back later, thanks for all your leveldb help sipa and D34TH!
1078 2012-10-21 16:58:40 <Diapolo> btw. src/txdb.h is included twice in the project file for Bitcoin-Qt
1079 2012-10-21 16:58:56 ThomasV has joined
1080 2012-10-21 16:59:20 Diapolo has left ()
1081 2012-10-21 16:59:30 <sipa> jgarzik: i think in general having daily builds of git HEAD would be nice
1082 2012-10-21 17:01:09 Eslbaer has joined
1083 2012-10-21 17:03:19 TheEslbear has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1084 2012-10-21 17:03:52 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1085 2012-10-21 17:05:59 maaku has joined
1086 2012-10-21 17:08:19 <jgarzik> sipa: BlueMatt used to do nightly builds, in fact
1087 2012-10-21 17:08:39 <sipa> yes, but his jenkins seems a bit overworked
1088 2012-10-21 17:15:20 pnicholson has joined
1089 2012-10-21 17:23:37 skeledrew has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1090 2012-10-21 17:23:53 skeledrew has joined
1091 2012-10-21 17:26:20 tonikt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1092 2012-10-21 17:26:52 GMP has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1093 2012-10-21 17:29:13 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1094 2012-10-21 17:30:52 GMP has joined
1095 2012-10-21 17:31:26 <darkip> Is there any way to subscribe to the bitcoin client for block find notifications?
1096 2012-10-21 17:31:43 <sipa> -blocknotify
1097 2012-10-21 17:31:54 da2ce7_d has joined
1098 2012-10-21 17:32:16 <darkip> oh awesome, thanks
1099 2012-10-21 17:32:28 <darkip> and thanks for the help with the hash rate stuff the other day
1100 2012-10-21 17:32:41 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
1101 2012-10-21 17:32:45 <darkip> just written the script to calculate it all this weekend :)
1102 2012-10-21 17:34:12 <sipa> what formula? just average in a block window?
1103 2012-10-21 17:34:26 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1104 2012-10-21 17:34:28 toffoo has quit ()
1105 2012-10-21 17:34:39 <darkip> Yeah, average over time period/blocks
1106 2012-10-21 17:35:32 <darkip> What is regarded as a reasonable window size to avoid luck being too much of a factor?
1107 2012-10-21 17:35:39 <sipa> it's a delicate balance
1108 2012-10-21 17:35:53 <sipa> a longer window means you're no longer measuring the current speed, but the speed some time ago
1109 2012-10-21 17:36:02 <sipa> but it also reduces variance
1110 2012-10-21 17:36:22 <darkip> I'm currently looking at the last day
1111 2012-10-21 17:36:57 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
1112 2012-10-21 17:37:21 Arnavion has quit (Quit: Arnavion)
1113 2012-10-21 17:44:56 Arnavion has joined
1114 2012-10-21 17:47:52 maaku has joined
1115 2012-10-21 17:48:46 <gmaxwell> < Joric> someone made a front page! < please don't feed atlas
1116 2012-10-21 17:51:49 <sipa> well, at least he changed the thread title to something less dramatic
1117 2012-10-21 17:56:56 <sipa> hmm, the thread is also locked; maybe some mod changed the title?
1118 2012-10-21 17:58:10 <gmaxwell> sipa: under that name. He also started two other threads, one about pruning destroying the network, and one with a title like the bitcointalk one.
1119 2012-10-21 17:59:04 <sipa> what are you talking about?
1120 2012-10-21 17:59:33 <gmaxwell> sipa: my comment to joric was about reddit posts. (I realize that may not be clear now)
1121 2012-10-21 18:00:00 <sipa> i realized you were talking about reddit, but i was talking about bitcointalk.org
1122 2012-10-21 18:01:05 <BlueMatt> sipa: waiting on resolution of a jdk bug to fix jenkins now :(
1123 2012-10-21 18:01:21 <gmaxwell> sipa: yea, I didn't follow your initial responseâ I thought you were saying the reddit thread had a better name.
1124 2012-10-21 18:01:56 <sipa> gmaxwell: no, i noticed Atlas' original FUD thread on bitcointalk.org had changed name, while also having become locked
1125 2012-10-21 18:02:34 <BlueMatt> maybe ill just give up and write a third dnsseed based on pynode...
1126 2012-10-21 18:03:51 <sipa> what's wrong with mine? (not that i have a problem with more variety in dns seeding software)
1127 2012-10-21 18:08:44 <maaku> BlueMatt: sipa's works really well
1128 2012-10-21 18:09:35 <sipa> well, there are some flaws - i want to reduce the cpu usage, make it schedule retries better, and make it check for actual blocks
1129 2012-10-21 18:10:16 <sipa> still, that's less work than writing one from scratch, i think
1130 2012-10-21 18:10:24 <sipa> but if you enjoy doing that, please do :)
1131 2012-10-21 18:11:15 <maaku> sipa: btw, my alt chain branch has been working fine for a few weeks now
1132 2012-10-21 18:12:41 <sipa> ok, good to hear
1133 2012-10-21 18:13:33 <TD> good evening
1134 2012-10-21 18:13:53 <BlueMatt> sipa: its either write my own (again) which provides variety in dns seed software or track down the 100% cpu bug in yours (which I dont think should be too hard, but Id rather go for the variety)
1135 2012-10-21 18:14:05 <sipa> TD: hi there
1136 2012-10-21 18:14:13 <BlueMatt> sipa: and writing one from scratch with bitcoinj was really easy...until I hit jdk bugs
1137 2012-10-21 18:15:05 <sipa> ic
1138 2012-10-21 18:16:06 bitcoinz has joined
1139 2012-10-21 18:16:55 Zarutian has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1140 2012-10-21 18:17:34 Zarutian has joined
1141 2012-10-21 18:20:18 Eslbaer has quit (Quit: Verlassend)
1142 2012-10-21 18:21:14 bitcoinz has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1143 2012-10-21 18:22:32 Arnavion has quit (Quit: ==kimi ni nante okureba ii no==)
1144 2012-10-21 18:24:23 <BlueMatt> TD: hey
1145 2012-10-21 18:25:44 Arnavion has joined
1146 2012-10-21 18:25:50 <BlueMatt> TD: I did a few minor refactors to my branch over the weekend (rebased onto your master, tweaked a few things, etc)
1147 2012-10-21 18:26:02 bitcoinz has joined
1148 2012-10-21 18:26:50 <TD> cool
1149 2012-10-21 18:26:58 <TD> i was busy last week but i plan to take another look this week
1150 2012-10-21 18:27:04 <BlueMatt> np
1151 2012-10-21 18:27:49 <BlueMatt> (working on reverse headers sync now...its really easy to get working at the application level, but moving it into PeerGroup is a pain, plus I havent thought much about how to deal with wallets there...)
1152 2012-10-21 18:30:59 bitcoinz has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1153 2012-10-21 18:31:00 <BlueMatt> TD: will a wallet blow up, that you know of, if you tell it that you downloaded the chain twice (once without txes, once with)?
1154 2012-10-21 18:31:14 <TD> i think it will get corrupted, yes. it's not designed to have blocks replayed into it
1155 2012-10-21 18:31:40 <BlueMatt> alright
1156 2012-10-21 18:32:55 bitcoinz has joined
1157 2012-10-21 18:34:30 galambo_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1158 2012-10-21 18:34:57 galambo_ has joined
1159 2012-10-21 18:40:44 bitcoinz has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1160 2012-10-21 18:41:36 <gmaxwell> hmph, after salvagewalleting that ultraprune mangled wallet, I'm now getting a nice generic "10/21/12 18:05:32 Bitcoin: Cannot initialize keypool" and then the node stops cleanly.
1161 2012-10-21 18:42:36 bitcoinz has joined
1162 2012-10-21 18:46:13 <sipa> gmaxwell: nice catch
1163 2012-10-21 18:46:22 <sipa> -salvagewallet should set fFirstRun to false
1164 2012-10-21 18:47:04 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1165 2012-10-21 18:47:40 devrandom has joined
1166 2012-10-21 18:48:33 <sipa> or at least the keypool init shouldn't be done
1167 2012-10-21 18:55:27 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
1168 2012-10-21 18:57:16 harkon_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1169 2012-10-21 18:57:23 harkon_ has joined
1170 2012-10-21 18:58:17 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1171 2012-10-21 18:58:17 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1172 2012-10-21 18:58:17 nsh has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1173 2012-10-21 18:58:18 random_cat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1174 2012-10-21 18:59:51 paraipan has joined
1175 2012-10-21 19:00:44 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1176 2012-10-21 19:00:54 bitcoinz has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1177 2012-10-21 19:00:57 darkee has joined
1178 2012-10-21 19:01:09 molecular has joined
1179 2012-10-21 19:01:55 random_cat has joined
1180 2012-10-21 19:02:12 <sipa> gmaxwell: does my patch fix the zero-balance problem?
1181 2012-10-21 19:03:26 <gmaxwell> sipa: yes, it appears to... I'm not completely done resyncing the chain yet, but it's part way done and the balance is not zero.
1182 2012-10-21 19:03:32 bitcoinz has joined
1183 2012-10-21 19:03:48 <gmaxwell> (I tried a number of other things first, e.g. the rescan and salvagewallet)
1184 2012-10-21 19:03:54 rdponticelli has joined
1185 2012-10-21 19:04:19 <sipa> gmaxwell: well, the bug that was fixed (which may or may not be the entire issue) would have caused to go to zero immediately at startup, and never change
1186 2012-10-21 19:04:51 <gmaxwell> sipa: ah, I wasn't sure if it was at startup or during resync since I reproduced it before with a chainless node.
1187 2012-10-21 19:05:08 <gmaxwell> In any case, yes it's fixed.
1188 2012-10-21 19:08:25 <sipa> seems i can keep a node on valgrind keep up with the network, without problems :)
1189 2012-10-21 19:09:04 <gmaxwell> sipa: yep. I have a couple that run that way.
1190 2012-10-21 19:09:04 stamit has joined
1191 2012-10-21 19:12:56 maqr has joined
1192 2012-10-21 19:17:47 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1193 2012-10-21 19:20:18 stamit has left ()
1194 2012-10-21 19:20:34 Diapolo has joined
1195 2012-10-21 19:21:14 rdponticelli has joined
1196 2012-10-21 19:21:19 <Diapolo> Re, any news on that InitMessage bug?
1197 2012-10-21 19:22:00 <sipa> Diapolo: yes, i'll just remove those uiMessages
1198 2012-10-21 19:23:09 <Diapolo> If you want I can create that patch, so you can work on more important stuff?
1199 2012-10-21 19:23:31 <sipa> go ahead
1200 2012-10-21 19:23:34 pusle has quit ()
1201 2012-10-21 19:25:56 dust-otc has joined
1202 2012-10-21 19:25:56 <sipa> jgarzik: i'm reworking your -reindex patch on top of ultraprune
1203 2012-10-21 19:26:49 kreal is now known as WalletBit
1204 2012-10-21 19:27:38 <Diapolo> sipa: shouldn't the ThreadImport() also reside in a try-catch like in other threads we use?
1205 2012-10-21 19:28:59 <sipa> Diapolo: it would be cleaner, but it's safe now; LoadExternalBlockFile has a try-catch around the essential part
1206 2012-10-21 19:29:20 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1207 2012-10-21 19:29:50 Raccoon` has joined
1208 2012-10-21 19:31:09 Raccoon has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1209 2012-10-21 19:31:28 Raccoon` is now known as Raccoon
1210 2012-10-21 19:37:56 <yellowhat> short quistion: where can i find the pgp signed announcment for 0.7.1 ?
1211 2012-10-21 19:47:42 <Diapolo> sipa: as it's not worth further discussion, my "blockchain -> block chain" pull is now non-translation changing, are you fine with just merging it to easen the progress?
1212 2012-10-21 19:47:55 <Diapolo> LOL thanks ^^
1213 2012-10-21 19:48:00 <gmaxwell> yellowhat: there doesn't appear to be a signed _announcement_ there are the signed release files however.
1214 2012-10-21 19:48:14 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
1215 2012-10-21 19:48:29 <yellowhat> so how do you check it practically
1216 2012-10-21 19:49:10 <gmaxwell> yellowhat: you check the actual files.
1217 2012-10-21 19:49:23 sirk390 has joined
1218 2012-10-21 19:49:30 RainbowDashh has joined
1219 2012-10-21 19:49:37 <gmaxwell> http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.7.1/ < SHA256SUMS.asc is the signed hashes
1220 2012-10-21 19:49:51 WalletBit has left ()
1221 2012-10-21 19:50:08 xisalty has joined
1222 2012-10-21 19:54:48 <midnightmagic> or you accept that the person who signs things is the same one that has commit access to the github repository and you ask politely for all the devs to start signing off on all their changes automatically. :-)
1223 2012-10-21 19:55:57 asuk has joined
1224 2012-10-21 19:56:35 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: the tags are signed in the repository.
1225 2012-10-21 19:56:45 <midnightmagic> that's pretty awesome. I didn't know that.
1226 2012-10-21 19:57:07 <midnightmagic> my git is old enough it doesn't know how to git log --show-signature
1227 2012-10-21 19:57:46 Raziel_ has joined
1228 2012-10-21 19:57:53 senseless has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1229 2012-10-21 20:00:08 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1230 2012-10-21 20:00:08 RainbowD_ has joined
1231 2012-10-21 20:00:10 RainbowD_ is now known as RainbowDashh
1232 2012-10-21 20:00:37 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1233 2012-10-21 20:03:41 stevep has joined
1234 2012-10-21 20:10:01 OneFixt_ has joined
1235 2012-10-21 20:13:02 xisalty has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1236 2012-10-21 20:13:55 OneFixt has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1237 2012-10-21 20:14:04 Joric has joined
1238 2012-10-21 20:14:04 Joric has quit (Changing host)
1239 2012-10-21 20:14:04 Joric has joined
1240 2012-10-21 20:18:50 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1241 2012-10-21 20:19:33 <Diapolo> gmaxwell: Thanks for the single Testnetnode which is reacheable via Tor HS ^^.
1242 2012-10-21 20:19:57 <Diapolo> I had my testnet client running for hours and now it's getting blocks from you ^^.
1243 2012-10-21 20:20:12 Raziel__ has joined
1244 2012-10-21 20:22:05 <Diapolo> sipa: Seems I just got an Assertian failure in main.cpp 1530 from assert(pindex->pprev == view.GetBestBlock()); while doing an initial chain-sync. Can't tell if it was the testnet oder mainnet client though.
1245 2012-10-21 20:22:41 <Diapolo> alright, it was the testnet client :D as that one is gone now after clicking OK
1246 2012-10-21 20:23:01 Raziel_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1247 2012-10-21 20:23:36 <sipa> Diapolo: that shouldn't happen anyway...
1248 2012-10-21 20:23:58 BlackPrapor has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1249 2012-10-21 20:24:05 RainbowDashh is now known as SevenNames_NOT_E
1250 2012-10-21 20:25:04 <Diapolo> just wanted to mention it any idea?
1251 2012-10-21 20:25:31 <sipa> you've given me very little context
1252 2012-10-21 20:25:53 SevenNames_NOT_E is now known as RainbowDashh
1253 2012-10-21 20:26:42 <Diapolo> init chain sync, Win 7 x64 own build with my core proxy patches applied, -onlynet="Tor" ... it was just sitting in my system tray
1254 2012-10-21 20:26:54 <Diapolo> and afaik I had setgenerate true 4
1255 2012-10-21 20:27:03 pnicholson has quit (Quit: pnicholson)
1256 2012-10-21 20:27:25 stevep has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1257 2012-10-21 20:27:26 pnicholson has joined
1258 2012-10-21 20:28:19 Joric has quit ()
1259 2012-10-21 20:30:04 <root2> gmaxwell: Bitcoin uses ECDSA with 256-bit keys correct?
1260 2012-10-21 20:30:24 <sipa> root2: yes, it uses the secp256k1 curve
1261 2012-10-21 20:30:56 <root2> is ECDSA amenable to key lengthening? Or, is there a suitable 512 bit curve to use?
1262 2012-10-21 20:31:16 <sipa> there are other curves, yes, with different sizes
1263 2012-10-21 20:31:27 <sipa> not sure what you mean by key lengthening
1264 2012-10-21 20:31:53 <root2> can the algorithm be easily adjusted for arbitrary (power of two) length keys?
1265 2012-10-21 20:32:17 <sipa> you need a specific curve - there are some predefined ones, or you can generate your own
1266 2012-10-21 20:32:26 <sipa> it's not as easy as just saying : use size X"
1267 2012-10-21 20:32:28 <Titanium2> but what if I want a 1428.75 bit key?
1268 2012-10-21 20:32:51 <sipa> also, changing the signature algorithm is not particularly easy in bitcoin
1269 2012-10-21 20:33:01 <Luke-Jr> root2: the question is, is there a good reason to use a different curve ever?
1270 2012-10-21 20:33:04 <sipa> it's possible, and even without a hrd fork, but that's about it
1271 2012-10-21 20:33:17 <root2> wouldnt 512 be sufficent? if security is equal to half the key size, 256 should be sufficient for a looong time
1272 2012-10-21 20:33:45 <gmaxwell> root2: 128 should also be sufficient, absent currently unknown attacksâ which may be just as effective for 512.
1273 2012-10-21 20:33:49 <gmaxwell> er 256.
1274 2012-10-21 20:33:56 <root2> well ECDSA with 256 bit keys takes only 2^128 to brute force, yes?
1275 2012-10-21 20:33:56 <Luke-Jr> root2: I'm not aware of any known vulnerabilities in ECDSA, and when one is found, there is no reason to think merely using a different curve would help
1276 2012-10-21 20:34:01 <Titanium2> when you ahve millions of dollars being protected, you want more bits
1277 2012-10-21 20:34:01 <sipa> root2: correct
1278 2012-10-21 20:34:28 <root2> im not speaking of vulnerabilities in the algorithm, just the difficulty of the brute force
1279 2012-10-21 20:34:37 <sipa> root2: and the entire bitcoin network hasn't performed 2^70 sha iterations even
1280 2012-10-21 20:34:39 <gmaxwell> root2: just incrementing a non-reversable binary counter 2^128 times (much less doing something with it) is 'start harnessing all the output of the sun' level computing.
1281 2012-10-21 20:35:00 <Luke-Jr> root2: use multisig. 3-of-3 is 256^256^256 ;)
1282 2012-10-21 20:35:03 <Titanium2> it costs about nothign to use more bits
1283 2012-10-21 20:35:14 <Titanium2> a bit of storage space, and a bit of work when creating a block
1284 2012-10-21 20:35:26 <gmaxwell> Generally 128 bit security is considered the a solid standard of brute force unreachability.
1285 2012-10-21 20:35:34 <root2> I was aware that all of our sun's energy would be insufficient to count to 2^256, but i was unaware that 128 fell in the same range
1286 2012-10-21 20:35:45 <jgarzik> sipa: sigh. what was Atlas's thread?
1287 2012-10-21 20:35:56 sirk390 has joined
1288 2012-10-21 20:36:14 <sipa> jgarzik: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=119566.0
1289 2012-10-21 20:36:40 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: what *wasn't* Atlas's thread?
1290 2012-10-21 20:36:45 <gmaxwell> root2: all the sun's energy is enough to count to 2^128 under an ideally efficient non-reversable computer model. But not a computer buildable by all the current efforts of man.
1291 2012-10-21 20:38:21 <gmaxwell> Titanium2: in any case, it's not cheap. If it had originally been larger we'd be talking about half the scalability / decenteralization tradeoff. And fitting it in later would require carrying both, which is ugly. And just upping the ECC level doesn't forclose QC oriented attacks or attacks from mathmatical breakthroughs that break ecc.
1292 2012-10-21 20:38:51 <Diapolo> sipa: anything more I can give you for that assertion issue?
1293 2012-10-21 20:39:38 <root2> now is that taking into account the speedups associated with quantum computing? My understanding of shors algorithm and grovers algorithm indicates that superposition of states is being used, and that these might represent more than a traditional bit with lower energy costs fordiscrete state transitions
1294 2012-10-21 20:39:43 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: can you reproduce it?
1295 2012-10-21 20:39:45 <root2> but, i could be confused
1296 2012-10-21 20:40:32 <gmaxwell> root2: I have been blinded by your word salad. Can you try asking that another way? :P
1297 2012-10-21 20:40:40 <Diapolo> gmaxwell: currently no, I had a guess that I perhaps generated a testnet block via setgenerate, while doing the chain sync, can this be the cause?
1298 2012-10-21 20:40:54 <Luke-Jr> sipa: re the optional extra index, maybe it should maintain info needed to replace blockchain.info with a GUI page?
1299 2012-10-21 20:41:13 <Luke-Jr> sipa: eg, balances of arbitrary scriptPubKeys
1300 2012-10-21 20:41:44 <sipa> Luke-Jr: that's one step further even, and I don't like having things depend on the availability of "balance of an address"
1301 2012-10-21 20:42:19 <gmaxwell> root2: er, I can try answering. QC is magical unicorn land right now, it may turn out that there are physical limits that make building the kind of very large QC's required for cracking asymetric crypto infeasable; they're certantly pratically infeasable now. But assuming that they become possible to build
1302 2012-10-21 20:42:23 <Luke-Jr> sipa: users obviously want to be able to see that info though
1303 2012-10-21 20:42:35 <sipa> Luke-Jr: unfortunately
1304 2012-10-21 20:42:58 <Luke-Jr> root2: afaik, QC in theory breaks ECDSA entirely
1305 2012-10-21 20:43:05 <sipa> but if a full txid-to-diskpos index is optionally available, while not go all the way and do it for address-to-txid as well
1306 2012-10-21 20:43:41 <gmaxwell> root2: ecdsaâ with reallyâ any length is insecure against a sufficiently large QC, the slowdown from additional size would be too low to help. The same issue is not true for hash functions because grovers gives a tightly bounded sqrt() speedup on general non-linear search.
1307 2012-10-21 20:43:44 optimator_ has joined
1308 2012-10-21 20:44:01 optimator has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1309 2012-10-21 20:44:03 conman has joined
1310 2012-10-21 20:44:09 <gmaxwell> root2: If very large QC's became a concern we wouldn't deploy larger ecdsa we'd deploy lamport signatures.
1311 2012-10-21 20:44:19 <jgarzik> sipa: seeing as how people are jumping on ultraprune testing (great!), we should probably go ahead and merge the wallet fix
1312 2012-10-21 20:44:40 * jgarzik hasn't had a chance to verify it yet... today was family pumpkin patch day ;p
1313 2012-10-21 20:45:16 <gmaxwell> Unforuntately lamport signatures are very large. The ultraprune plus UTXO set ideas show how bitcoin could be viable with signatures as large as lamport ones... but its not something that would make sense speculative. The loss of scalablity and decenteralization that comes with block bloat is a bigger risk than pixie dust computers.
1314 2012-10-21 20:45:42 <root2> gmaxwell: Cool, Grovers just had me tweaked a bit, 128 bits can be searched in 2^64, thats not unreasonable for a government or large corporate entity to undertake in the next few years
1315 2012-10-21 20:46:22 <root2> is NTRUsign viable post-quantum?
1316 2012-10-21 20:46:33 <sipa> Luke-Jr: the motivation behind ultraprune is making resources scale with the size of the UTXO set, and not with the size of history
1317 2012-10-21 20:46:39 <root2> i dont know many QC secure assymetric algos
1318 2012-10-21 20:46:56 <sipa> Luke-Jr: an index for the full history breaks that
1319 2012-10-21 20:46:56 <root2> asymetric
1320 2012-10-21 20:47:08 <gmaxwell> root2: you wouldn't use grovers for ecdsa. On a sufficiently large QC (enormous) you can break 256 bit ecdsa in ~2^32 operations.
1321 2012-10-21 20:47:16 <sipa> Luke-Jr: it's certainly useful for debugging, and that is why i'd consider adding it
1322 2012-10-21 20:47:37 <sipa> Luke-Jr: but apart from that, i want to discourage any use that depends on the availability of such an index
1323 2012-10-21 20:48:11 <Luke-Jr> sipa: a blockchain.info replacement (ie, no more web blockchain viewer required) needs it AFAIK
1324 2012-10-21 20:48:22 <gmaxwell> root2: NTRUsign is fairly unattractive for multiple reasonsâ for one, it's not obviously as _classically_ secure as ecdsa. My recommendation is lamport. It is intutively as strong as any other pratical signature scheme implementation.
1325 2012-10-21 20:49:06 <sipa> Luke-Jr: of course it does - i consider that 'debug use'; using it for anything else (like fast rescanning for "the blockchain is your wallet!" purposes) is a problem imho
1326 2012-10-21 20:49:31 <Diapolo> gmaxwell: a simple no your idea is stuipd or yes could be, would be nice ^^ even in between a Quantum computer discussion ^^
1327 2012-10-21 20:49:51 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: I don't know. It sounds like a guess.
1328 2012-10-21 20:50:03 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: I think we already know the internal miner is somewhat buggy.
1329 2012-10-21 20:50:50 PhantomSpark has quit (2!~kvirc@pool-71-251-16-25.nycmny.fios.verizon.net|Quit: Not all that glitter is gold not all who wander are lost.)
1330 2012-10-21 20:51:33 <gmaxwell> Our ecosystem dependency on blockchain.info (esp now that blockexplorer is pretty much dying) bugs me but I'm not sure what to do about it. Even with good integrated 'explorer' functionality in the client people will still use the website out of convience.
1331 2012-10-21 20:52:25 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I don't see how a website is more convenient
1332 2012-10-21 20:52:42 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: a well-indexed local client can be much more responsible and user friendly
1333 2012-10-21 20:52:54 <Diapolo> gmaxwell: I always loved to use it for a quick testnet-block generation ... if it's bugged it needs fixing or removal IMHO.
1334 2012-10-21 20:52:56 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: because I can just give you a url to a website.
1335 2012-10-21 20:53:05 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: bitcoin URIs version 2 :p
1336 2012-10-21 20:53:09 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: patches accepted! :P
1337 2012-10-21 20:54:14 <sipa> Luke-Jr: now THAT is exactly what I don't want to see
1338 2012-10-21 20:54:29 <gmaxwell> Hopefully luke does the ui integration for BFG miner and we could just remove the internal miner and package bfgminer with bitcoin.
1339 2012-10-21 20:54:33 <Diapolo> gmaxwell: I don't know what's broken + I really don't want to mess with mining internals :).
1340 2012-10-21 20:54:34 <sipa> as it means a community that learns to depend on the availability of all historic transaction data
1341 2012-10-21 20:54:49 <sipa> well... i suppose we already have that anyway
1342 2012-10-21 20:55:10 <gmaxwell> sipa: we doâ though they're used to picking it up from a couple of centeralized websites.
1343 2012-10-21 20:55:49 <gmaxwell> At a _minimum_ we should try to avoid making it hard to run an explorer sites... so there at least will be lots of choice.
1344 2012-10-21 20:56:07 <gmaxwell> e.g. having to write your own node software to accomplish that kinda stinks.
1345 2012-10-21 20:56:50 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: bleh
1346 2012-10-21 20:56:53 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: I like the internal miner
1347 2012-10-21 20:57:30 <jgarzik> We already package pyminer with the reference client ;-)
1348 2012-10-21 20:57:32 * jgarzik runs
1349 2012-10-21 20:57:38 <sipa> we do? :o
1350 2012-10-21 20:57:52 <Luke-Jr> sipa: in contrib, but it's trivial
1351 2012-10-21 20:58:00 <jgarzik> sipa: all sorts of strange gadgetry in contrib/
1352 2012-10-21 20:58:12 <sipa> yah
1353 2012-10-21 20:58:50 <sipa> anyway, it's a balance; a community depending on historic data via a centralized site is worse than one that depends on such data being available locally, but both are significantly worse than not depending on either
1354 2012-10-21 21:01:14 <Luke-Jr> O.o
1355 2012-10-21 21:01:31 <Luke-Jr> Walmart photo CDs (from film) have the Qt DLLs in the root
1356 2012-10-21 21:03:53 eb3kk has joined
1357 2012-10-21 21:04:13 <sipa> jgarzik: making AcceptBlock deal with the genesis block is fun
1358 2012-10-21 21:04:20 <sipa> it fails several tests :p
1359 2012-10-21 21:04:32 <Luke-Jr> sipa: also unsafe ;)
1360 2012-10-21 21:04:37 <sipa> ?
1361 2012-10-21 21:04:58 <Luke-Jr> sipa: you might index the coinbase txn!
1362 2012-10-21 21:05:01 <sipa> i just added an if (hash != hashGenesisBlock) { DO_TESTS }
1363 2012-10-21 21:05:25 <sipa> Luke-Jr: thanks for reminding me to check that
1364 2012-10-21 21:05:48 <jgarzik> sipa: eh?
1365 2012-10-21 21:06:15 <sipa> jgarzik: to prevent the genesis block being added on every -reindex, you want to reuse the existing one on disk
1366 2012-10-21 21:06:19 <Luke-Jr> hmm, we should probably document that explicit somewhere
1367 2012-10-21 21:06:24 <jgarzik> sipa: In the context of -reindex? In the old configuration, -reindex always added a new genesis block as a consequence of LoadBlockIndex
1368 2012-10-21 21:06:27 <jgarzik> sipa: ah ok
1369 2012-10-21 21:07:01 <jgarzik> sipa: a new genesis block seemed like a small cost, compared to additional code just for one block
1370 2012-10-21 21:07:05 * jgarzik dislikes special case code
1371 2012-10-21 21:07:22 <sipa> jgarzik: well, it's very hard to make the current block file code deal with it otherwise
1372 2012-10-21 21:07:44 <sipa> as there is no simple "append to block file" logic anymore, it picks a file and position based on the metadata about the block files
1373 2012-10-21 21:08:01 <sipa> without a database, that means at the beginning of the first file, resulting in a pre-allocation at that point
1374 2012-10-21 21:08:08 <sipa> overwriting the first few thousand blocks
1375 2012-10-21 21:08:35 <sipa> Luke-Jr: the block connection logic is already special cased to ignore connecting the genesis block
1376 2012-10-21 21:09:09 <conman> yo jgarzik
1377 2012-10-21 21:09:19 <jgarzik> sipa: what is preallocation, specifically? I saw that in log messages, and it raised my curiosity. Do you write zeroes?
1378 2012-10-21 21:09:22 <jgarzik> conman: word
1379 2012-10-21 21:09:28 <sipa> jgarzik: yes - for now
1380 2012-10-21 21:09:48 <sipa> jgarzik: there is a function in util.cpp for that - it's not required to overwrite the specified range, but allowed to
1381 2012-10-21 21:09:50 sirk390 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1382 2012-10-21 21:09:59 <jgarzik> wow
1383 2012-10-21 21:10:00 <sipa> it can be overridden with OS-specific implementations
1384 2012-10-21 21:10:06 <jgarzik> orphan map 100% full, here
1385 2012-10-21 21:10:11 <jgarzik> block height is correct
1386 2012-10-21 21:10:21 <jgarzik> 10/21/12 20:58:13 stored orphan tx 51d305bbd9 (mapsz 10001)
1387 2012-10-21 21:10:22 <jgarzik> 10/21/12 20:58:13 mapOrphan overflow, removed 1 tx
1388 2012-10-21 21:10:25 <jgarzik> been like that for hours
1389 2012-10-21 21:10:40 <sipa> are there still transactions being accepted?
1390 2012-10-21 21:10:44 <jgarzik> yes
1391 2012-10-21 21:10:55 <jgarzik> bitcoind is otherwise functioning normally, AFAICT
1392 2012-10-21 21:11:07 <Diapolo> sipa: I'd like to look into OS specific code for the pre-alloc on Windows over the next weeks.
1393 2012-10-21 21:11:17 <sipa> Diapolo: it's very easy :)
1394 2012-10-21 21:11:48 <Diapolo> Because of your AllocateFileRange()?
1395 2012-10-21 21:11:59 <jgarzik> sipa: later on, when the dust settles, I might write a pullreq for: #ifdef linux ... posix_fallocate()
1396 2012-10-21 21:12:06 <sipa> jgarzik: please do
1397 2012-10-21 21:12:24 <sipa> Diapolo: yes, just provide an OS-specific version of that
1398 2012-10-21 21:12:24 <jgarzik> conman: a bit of history...
1399 2012-10-21 21:12:48 <Diapolo> I have working code for the former BDB code, shouldn't be to hard :).
1400 2012-10-21 21:13:03 <jgarzik> conman: there was a long-standing github bitcoin pull request for "BIP 22 compliance: getmemorypool" from luke-jr
1401 2012-10-21 21:13:21 <jgarzik> conman: of course, being typical luke-jr, he wrote the BIP, then demanded compliance ;-)
1402 2012-10-21 21:13:45 <conman> which was delayed for the usual reeasons it being his own megalomaniac narcissistic personality disorder based BIP that had nothing to do with anyone else
1403 2012-10-21 21:13:47 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: erm, not quite. that's like way after the whole BIP process was mostly done :P
1404 2012-10-21 21:14:00 <conman> right
1405 2012-10-21 21:14:14 <conman> yes I know he's here, but I have him on ignore so I don't care
1406 2012-10-21 21:14:29 <jgarzik> conman: I disliked the name, so went in to rename it... and wound up making a bunch of different changes. Simplified it, stripped out several things, and split out block submission into a separate RPC, submitblock
1407 2012-10-21 21:14:39 <conman> nod
1408 2012-10-21 21:15:03 <jgarzik> conman: The end result is what you now see as BIP 22
1409 2012-10-21 21:15:10 <conman> ok
1410 2012-10-21 21:15:15 <jgarzik> conman: During that development discussion, luke-jr and I discussed pools
1411 2012-10-21 21:15:33 Diapolo has left ()
1412 2012-10-21 21:15:49 <sipa> conman: nice seeing you here - i used to run your kernel :)
1413 2012-10-21 21:15:54 <conman> :)
1414 2012-10-21 21:15:56 <jgarzik> conman: As I understood it at the time, BIP 23 contained all the extensions on top of BIP 22, which SHOULD HAVE SUPPORTED all pool modes, including the centralized pool mode we're now discussing
1415 2012-10-21 21:16:10 <conman> nod
1416 2012-10-21 21:16:48 eb3kk has quit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com)
1417 2012-10-21 21:16:48 <jgarzik> conman: as such, if BIP 23 is missing the ability to pass along block header + just enough info to modify extranonce, that should be added.
1418 2012-10-21 21:17:19 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: the primary (and for a long time, only) purpose of GBT was to REPLACE centralized mining; so it really doesn't make sense to have expected it to have a centralized mode
1419 2012-10-21 21:17:20 <jgarzik> conman: based on your comments, it sounds like that is the case HOWEVER I could have sworn luke-jr pointed me to "coinbaseaux" or somesuch gadgetry which permitted merkle update
1420 2012-10-21 21:17:22 <conman> well it is missing and it appears to be intentional but it doesn't change the fact 98% of miners would prefer to use that mode
1421 2012-10-21 21:18:06 <conman> it doesn't appear like it needs something big, but I haven't really digested the layout or care to understand all the intricacies of it, just to discuss what's missing
1422 2012-10-21 21:18:28 <conman> I'm guessing adding pretty much the merkle data in a manner that the stratum protocol does is all that would be required
1423 2012-10-21 21:19:47 <jgarzik> conman: personally I think there should be two modes... the easiest way to replace getwork in existing miners involves _not touching coinbase at all_. That reduces the nonce range between requests... but it is the minimum path to getwork -> getblocktemplate for miners.
1424 2012-10-21 21:19:49 <gmaxwell> What the motivation for support that in the reference software? It's still not a pool server.
1425 2012-10-21 21:19:52 <sipa> i've always seen BIP22 as a "provide all data to do work generation" system, and not directly a high-efficiency mining protocol
1426 2012-10-21 21:20:13 <sipa> you'll always need different protocols closer to the hardware anyway
1427 2012-10-21 21:20:15 <jgarzik> conman: the next step up in complexity is recalculating the merkle stuff
1428 2012-10-21 21:20:40 <conman> right it's not a big deal for the pool and they'd end u p sending much less anyway so it's to the pool's advantage as well as the miner's
1429 2012-10-21 21:20:41 <Luke-Jr> sipa: it's always been intended as the latter; the bitcoind compatibility was just a secondary thing
1430 2012-10-21 21:21:08 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: perhaps your intent. :P
1431 2012-10-21 21:21:35 <conman> gmaxwell, the motivation for what?
1432 2012-10-21 21:21:40 <gmaxwell> (it's fine for there to be multiple goals by multiple people)
1433 2012-10-21 21:21:43 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: shrug, a lot of the other contributions to it were very much only useful for the miner<->pool
1434 2012-10-21 21:22:01 <gmaxwell> conman: having a mode in the reference client that sends the minimum required to increment extranonce.
1435 2012-10-21 21:22:33 <sipa> Luke-Jr: i misformulated; i certainly don't mean it's just a bitcoind-to-others protocol, it's intended to be more than that, but imho not past the "work generation" barrier - wherever that happens
1436 2012-10-21 21:23:01 <Luke-Jr> sipa: ah, i c
1437 2012-10-21 21:23:05 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: reference client supports getwork. getwork continues to be useful in the ref client. however, getwork is inefficient. it is nice to have a modern version, which will also be useful in the ref client.
1438 2012-10-21 21:23:20 * jgarzik still uses cpuminer all the time, on testnet
1439 2012-10-21 21:23:23 <conman> gmaxwell, the motivation is that slush1 and Eleuthria have a mining protocol designed with that exactly in mind to scale massively for the future at minimum network cost, yet gbt which was the modification of getwork was a competing standard and did not fit that
1440 2012-10-21 21:24:06 <gmaxwell> conman: uhhhh. GBT is not a 'modification of getwork', it's a refinement of the original getmemorypool.
1441 2012-10-21 21:24:07 <sipa> and their stratum server uses GBT
1442 2012-10-21 21:24:08 <conman> so we have a pool based non-bip standard yet again
1443 2012-10-21 21:24:09 kreal has joined
1444 2012-10-21 21:24:13 <sipa> so what's the problem?
1445 2012-10-21 21:24:15 <gmaxwell> Which was created to allow external coinbase creation.
1446 2012-10-21 21:24:43 <conman> sipa, the point is that some pool ops have adopted just gbt and wish miners to talk that to them, mainly because they use luke's pool software
1447 2012-10-21 21:24:46 <gmaxwell> conman: So tell slush to not work in @#$@ secret and do a BIP for stratum.
1448 2012-10-21 21:24:57 <conman> well
1449 2012-10-21 21:25:00 <jgarzik> sipa: tl;dr... mining protocol should support a mode that does not dump all transactions
1450 2012-10-21 21:25:11 <jgarzik> sipa: that's a lot of data, that miners probably don't care about
1451 2012-10-21 21:25:15 <conman> gmaxwell, you tell him
1452 2012-10-21 21:25:16 <sipa> bitcoind is not a pool server
1453 2012-10-21 21:25:17 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: in bitcoind? I disagree.
1454 2012-10-21 21:25:22 <gmaxwell> Bitcoind is not a poolserver.
1455 2012-10-21 21:25:30 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: reference client supports getwork. getwork continues to be useful in the ref client. however, getwork is inefficient. it is nice to have a modern version, which will also be useful in the ref client.
1456 2012-10-21 21:25:40 <sipa> i think stratum is very nicely documented, from what i've seen
1457 2012-10-21 21:25:44 <jgarzik> thus, irrelevant.
1458 2012-10-21 21:26:01 <conman> sipa, it is
1459 2012-10-21 21:26:07 <sipa> i hoped GBT could move all mining-related crap out of bitcoind
1460 2012-10-21 21:26:12 <conman> it's just not a bip
1461 2012-10-21 21:26:14 <Luke-Jr> it may very well be that standardizing Stratum is the way forward, IMO
1462 2012-10-21 21:26:15 <sipa> it provides exactly what is needed to do so
1463 2012-10-21 21:26:40 <Luke-Jr> but there's not really any problems in GBT that need solving today, so *shrug*
1464 2012-10-21 21:26:49 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: luke wrote a nice library to do mining straight off gbt.
1465 2012-10-21 21:27:04 <conman> that doesnt make it good tho
1466 2012-10-21 21:27:06 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: irrelevant
1467 2012-10-21 21:27:06 <sipa> it's indeed a pity that stratum didn't follow the BIP process, but imho it server a different purpose than GBT
1468 2012-10-21 21:27:10 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: does not solve stated problem
1469 2012-10-21 21:27:12 <conman> as jgarzik said
1470 2012-10-21 21:27:31 <Luke-Jr> sipa: it does exactly the same thing as GBT, but keeps the miner in the dark like getwork did
1471 2012-10-21 21:27:52 <sipa> Luke-Jr: it focusses on efficiency, and not on transparency
1472 2012-10-21 21:28:07 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: I'm missing your stated problem. Adding pool crud to GBT doesn't make old cpuminer more useful.
1473 2012-10-21 21:28:09 <sipa> which is what you want within a trusted, efficient domain, close to the hardware
1474 2012-10-21 21:28:18 <sipa> GBT is what you want outside of that
1475 2012-10-21 21:28:27 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: GBT should have a mode to -not- send all the transactions
1476 2012-10-21 21:28:36 <sipa> i see no reason for that
1477 2012-10-21 21:28:44 <jgarzik> getwork users disagree
1478 2012-10-21 21:28:47 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: You're stating that as an axiom. I don't agree (yet). You can't convince me by just repeating it. ::shrugs::
1479 2012-10-21 21:28:47 <sipa> it's not intended to be efficient
1480 2012-10-21 21:28:49 <jgarzik> they see reason for it
1481 2012-10-21 21:28:55 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: why not have it send midstate too?
1482 2012-10-21 21:28:56 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: who does?
1483 2012-10-21 21:29:01 Rv has joined
1484 2012-10-21 21:29:17 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: No one is asking for remote pool miners to connect to bitcoind doing thatâ er, except you. AFAIK.
1485 2012-10-21 21:29:24 Rv is now known as Guest98336
1486 2012-10-21 21:29:30 <conman> because it is more work to send say 1000 transactions than it is 10 odd merkle bases
1487 2012-10-21 21:29:31 <slush1> conman and gmaxwell woke me up
1488 2012-10-21 21:29:40 <jgarzik> far more work, indeed
1489 2012-10-21 21:30:03 <slush1> gmaxwell: firstly, I'm not working secretly. You just don't care. I discuss the most of things on #stratum
1490 2012-10-21 21:30:26 <slush1> Then, I don't see a reason for creating BIP for something, which is not bitcoin-related
1491 2012-10-21 21:30:28 <sipa> slush1: is it correct that you have software which implements a Stratum server, and uses getblocktemplate() to communicate with any bitcoind?
1492 2012-10-21 21:30:29 <Luke-Jr> slush1: what do you think about putting Stratum MP through a BIP process, so it can be merged with GBT?
1493 2012-10-21 21:30:34 <Luke-Jr> slush1: it is bitcoin-related
1494 2012-10-21 21:30:34 <slush1> I mean - bitcoin protocol or bitcoin client
1495 2012-10-21 21:30:39 <jgarzik> conman: I wonder about the byte size of merkle bases, versus just a list of txids
1496 2012-10-21 21:30:49 <conman> jgarzik, we have that quantified
1497 2012-10-21 21:30:51 <gmaxwell> slush1: We have a public process. You announced stratum fully formed. I'm not trying to yell at you about it though. You should do as you want to do, but if you don't use the public process... well.
1498 2012-10-21 21:31:02 <slush1> sipa: yes, it is correct. It is opensource
1499 2012-10-21 21:31:17 <slush1> Luke-Jr: I don't think there's a chance to "put it together with GBT"
1500 2012-10-21 21:31:31 osmosis has joined
1501 2012-10-21 21:31:32 <gmaxwell> slush1: I'm also not complaining about stratum, conman was.
1502 2012-10-21 21:31:48 <sipa> slush1: does that server also implement getwork()?
1503 2012-10-21 21:31:50 <conman> I wasn't complaining about it...
1504 2012-10-21 21:31:53 <conman> I like stratum
1505 2012-10-21 21:31:58 <conman> jgarzik, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=108854.msg1284623#msg1284623
1506 2012-10-21 21:32:02 <conman> there's the exact figures
1507 2012-10-21 21:32:13 <slush1> btw today I released stratum extension, which allows miners to get transactions used by the pool. So Stratum is no longer "centralized" protocol, because miners can inspect the work online
1508 2012-10-21 21:32:14 <gmaxwell> I was saying that we don't need to bolt on things into GBT to make it more like stratum, especially in bitcoind which is not a poolserver... just because some feel stratum is not standarized enough.
1509 2012-10-21 21:32:16 <conman> 67 bytes per power of 2 transactions
1510 2012-10-21 21:32:36 xisalty has joined
1511 2012-10-21 21:32:42 <sipa> I say Stratum and GBT serve a different purpose, and trying to merge them would hurt both sides
1512 2012-10-21 21:32:59 <conman> sipa, it's not merging them...
1513 2012-10-21 21:32:59 <jgarzik> THIS IS NOT MAKING bitcoind MORE LIKE STRATUM </loud voice>
1514 2012-10-21 21:32:59 <slush1> sipa: no, my stratum server don't implement getwork. But I implemented "stratum proxy", which can connect to stratum pool and act as getwork server
1515 2012-10-21 21:33:02 <Luke-Jr> sipa: but they don't at all
1516 2012-10-21 21:33:02 <jgarzik> stop with the hyperbole
1517 2012-10-21 21:33:07 <conman> thanks jgarzik
1518 2012-10-21 21:33:20 <gmaxwell> sipa: agreed there, although I'm saddened to see stratum being used across trust domains, but whatever.
1519 2012-10-21 21:33:26 <sipa> gmaxwell: agree there
1520 2012-10-21 21:33:31 <TD> slush1: so mining clients can see which transactions are included? is there any way to hook this up to a local bitcoin node and verify the transactions have been seen?
1521 2012-10-21 21:33:33 <slush1> I really don't see a reason why to "put stratum to bitcoind"
1522 2012-10-21 21:33:37 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: well we're not communicating effectively. Because apparently I don't know what you want.
1523 2012-10-21 21:33:49 <sipa> TD: stratum doesn't provide that info, GBT does
1524 2012-10-21 21:33:56 <TD> i must have missed what GBT is
1525 2012-10-21 21:34:03 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: what is desired has been stated precisely: a mode that does not send the full transaction data to the miner
1526 2012-10-21 21:34:03 <slush1> TD: yes, mining clients can see full transactions and they can do any check on their side
1527 2012-10-21 21:34:07 <sipa> getblocktemplate, the successor to getmemorypool
1528 2012-10-21 21:34:07 <Luke-Jr> TD: yes, that's planned
1529 2012-10-21 21:34:17 <TD> ah right
1530 2012-10-21 21:34:17 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: Desired by who for what purpose?
1531 2012-10-21 21:34:21 <slush1> TD: although no checking algorithm is implemented, afaik
1532 2012-10-21 21:34:22 <sipa> jgarzik: so run a pool server in between
1533 2012-10-21 21:34:24 <TD> right
1534 2012-10-21 21:34:25 <jgarzik> slush1: nobody is trying to "put stratum to bitcoind"
1535 2012-10-21 21:34:33 <jgarzik> slush1: gmaxwell is waxing hyperbolic a bit
1536 2012-10-21 21:34:42 <slush1> jgarzik: well, I thought that somebody is asking to merge GBT and Stratum
1537 2012-10-21 21:34:44 <conman> seems everyone's stroking it atm...
1538 2012-10-21 21:34:48 <jgarzik> slush1: no, not at all
1539 2012-10-21 21:34:52 <slush1> as sipa said, it will hurt both sides in some way
1540 2012-10-21 21:34:54 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: Because conman was asking for it to use it _instead_ of stratum because statum was not sufficiently standard for his taste... and in that case he wouldn't be using it against bitcoind anyways, he'd be using it against a poolserver.
1541 2012-10-21 21:35:04 <conman> nononono gmaxwell
1542 2012-10-21 21:35:09 <conman> I LIKE stratum
1543 2012-10-21 21:35:14 <sipa> well if you're adding a mode to only send merkle paths over GBT, you're essentially recreating a less-efficient stratum
1544 2012-10-21 21:35:20 <conman> I would rather all pools USE stratum
1545 2012-10-21 21:35:28 <conman> but some are just using GBT
1546 2012-10-21 21:35:29 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: no, conman is speaking from the perspective of implementing GBT in his cgminer
1547 2012-10-21 21:35:52 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: since he insists on reinventing everything
1548 2012-10-21 21:35:57 <slush1> sipa: yes, "less efficient", but that matters
1549 2012-10-21 21:36:31 <gmaxwell> oh so he wants to force the pools using GBT for transparency to support a non-transparent mode so he can have less code/ less data? Well thats still pretty orthorgonal to what we offer in bitcoind.
1550 2012-10-21 21:36:55 <sipa> and i think that this doesn't fit within GBT's scope - i complained about the fact that GMP tried to do too much, and i still believe that
1551 2012-10-21 21:36:58 <gmaxwell> If people want to add extensions (which we wouldn't bother with in bitcoind) for that to GBT ::meh:: but I don't see why they wouldn't use stratum then.
1552 2012-10-21 21:37:06 <slush1> gmaxwell: exactly. That's the point why I don't think GBT and Stratum can live together. They are for different purpose
1553 2012-10-21 21:37:06 <sipa> GBT provides everything an external program needs to do efficient mining
1554 2012-10-21 21:37:17 <gmaxwell> slush1: well that was addressed by pulling out all the poolish stuff from the core.
1555 2012-10-21 21:37:31 <sipa> if you want to run thousands of getworks(), run a pool server that talks GBT to bitcoind
1556 2012-10-21 21:37:34 <gmaxwell> oops that was directed at sipa.
1557 2012-10-21 21:37:45 <slush1> gmaxwell: sipa: Still, GBT on pool requires a lot of overhead, like HTTP traffic, Long polling etc
1558 2012-10-21 21:38:10 <slush1> I *love* GBT, stratum server implementation was really easy
1559 2012-10-21 21:38:13 <Luke-Jr> sipa: in practice: miner --GBT--> poolserver --GBT--> bitcoind
1560 2012-10-21 21:38:18 <slush1> but *not* for pooled mining
1561 2012-10-21 21:38:29 <jgarzik> conman: anyway, to get back on topic... lets figure out what specifically BIP 23 needs
1562 2012-10-21 21:38:30 <sipa> or miner --Stratum--> poolserver --GBT--> bitcoind
1563 2012-10-21 21:38:43 <conman> jgarzik, ok
1564 2012-10-21 21:38:55 <gmaxwell> slush1: it works really fantastically for p2pool and stratum couldn't be used for that. :P
1565 2012-10-21 21:39:04 <conman> it needs to offer a mode with a set of merkle bases instead of a full list of transactions
1566 2012-10-21 21:39:08 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1567 2012-10-21 21:39:20 <sipa> can anyone answer me why you want to put this in bitcoind?
1568 2012-10-21 21:39:26 <sipa> we provide everything you need to do this externally
1569 2012-10-21 21:39:28 <conman> not in bitcoind
1570 2012-10-21 21:39:33 <conman> did we say bitcoind?
1571 2012-10-21 21:39:38 <sipa> oooh, right, sure
1572 2012-10-21 21:39:40 <gmaxwell> I thought jeff did.
1573 2012-10-21 21:39:47 <conman> jgarzik, ?
1574 2012-10-21 21:39:47 <gmaxwell> Yea, I don't care if it's not in bitcoind.
1575 2012-10-21 21:39:56 <conman> well
1576 2012-10-21 21:40:02 <gmaxwell> You will need to work that out with _luke_ because he's the author of the poolserver software that you'd need to implement it.
1577 2012-10-21 21:40:07 <conman> I gotta get my kids to school, I'll be back in 15 mins
1578 2012-10-21 21:40:10 <jgarzik> conman didn't say bitcoind
1579 2012-10-21 21:40:12 <jgarzik> but I did
1580 2012-10-21 21:40:26 <conman> hmm I can hang around for a bit more
1581 2012-10-21 21:40:28 <jgarzik> conman is just looking to improve GBT
1582 2012-10-21 21:40:33 <jgarzik> conman: go pick them up
1583 2012-10-21 21:40:36 <sipa> well, i'm completely against making bitcoind act more like a pool server
1584 2012-10-21 21:40:41 <jgarzik> conman: I gotta manage kids too
1585 2012-10-21 21:40:53 <conman> yah other end of the day here, taking them to school
1586 2012-10-21 21:41:02 <conman> it's am
1587 2012-10-21 21:41:16 <jgarzik> sipa: getwork already includes the "avoid full transaction dump" feature. GBT should have that too. It is simple consistency, in addition to efficiency.
1588 2012-10-21 21:41:18 <sipa> if you want to extend GBT with a more efficient version that isn't transparent, go ahead, but i think you're better off using stratum at that point
1589 2012-10-21 21:41:23 <slush1> Well, I don't like "one solution fits all". Why don't have one solution for extracting everything needed to build the block *outside* bitcoind and another solution for efficient remote mining? I don't understand why there's such war.
1590 2012-10-21 21:41:33 <sipa> jgarzik: if i could, i'd remove getwork
1591 2012-10-21 21:41:37 <slush1> why make GBT even more complicated
1592 2012-10-21 21:42:00 <jgarzik> slush1: GBT was always complicated, read BIP 23
1593 2012-10-21 21:42:13 <conman> I did, my eyes glazed over
1594 2012-10-21 21:42:16 <slush1> jgarzik: heh, I think that both BIPs are overcomplicated
1595 2012-10-21 21:42:24 <sipa> jgarzik: GBT is the one protocol that provides external programs with everything they need to mine efficiently, without burdening bitcoind
1596 2012-10-21 21:42:58 <sipa> if you say GBT (as provided by bitcoind) is not efficient enough, then put a program in between that does the work generation
1597 2012-10-21 21:43:15 <slush1> I don't expect that this low-level API will be somehow "optimized" for all cases.
1598 2012-10-21 21:43:41 <jgarzik> sipa: miner <-> bitcoind is still a real world use case, off mainnet
1599 2012-10-21 21:43:51 <jgarzik> sipa: no need for anything more complicated
1600 2012-10-21 21:44:13 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: it's bad to have mainnet and testnet usage diverge.
1601 2012-10-21 21:44:23 <sipa> jgarzik: then i'd very much like to see that change
1602 2012-10-21 21:44:26 <gmaxwell> I now p2pool mine testnet (er, by myself) to remove the unneeded divergence.
1603 2012-10-21 21:44:27 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: miner<->bitcoind does not require getwork
1604 2012-10-21 21:44:40 <jgarzik> Luke-Jr: no one said it did
1605 2012-10-21 21:44:56 <Luke-Jr> I get the feeling nobody understands anyone else here right now⦠._.
1606 2012-10-21 21:45:08 <gmaxwell> and as I mentioned before, luke wrote a work generation library that works fine against the current gbt. And if you're talking about solo mining and off mainnet the bandwidth isn't an issue.
1607 2012-10-21 21:45:08 <EvanR2> Luke-Jr: nice caps
1608 2012-10-21 21:46:46 <sipa> I want Bitcoind to not have to care about the Mining Business - they're a business after all and they will find their own solutions (stratum being a nice example). GBT is what allows them to do their thing without burdening bitcoind and its developers
1609 2012-10-21 21:47:01 <Luke-Jr> EvanR2: huh?
1610 2012-10-21 21:47:08 <jgarzik> sipa: that's sad
1611 2012-10-21 21:47:10 <slush1> sipa: I absolutely agree
1612 2012-10-21 21:47:25 <Luke-Jr> sipa: GBT is already a working solution, without Stratum :p
1613 2012-10-21 21:47:38 <sipa> Luke-Jr: so much the better
1614 2012-10-21 21:47:45 <jgarzik> sipa: giving up what little influence ref client has with the mining community :(
1615 2012-10-21 21:47:46 <sipa> go compete :)
1616 2012-10-21 21:47:46 <conman> you agree because you want everyone to use your protocol slush1
1617 2012-10-21 21:47:54 <slush1> lol, no
1618 2012-10-21 21:47:54 <jgarzik> ;p
1619 2012-10-21 21:47:57 <gmaxwell> sipa: I was about to say what jeff said...
1620 2012-10-21 21:48:07 <conman> ok so there is harm in the half arsed gbt being used by pools
1621 2012-10-21 21:48:12 <slush1> I personally don't understand why everything should be in BIP and implemented in bitcoin
1622 2012-10-21 21:48:15 <slush1> bitcoind
1623 2012-10-21 21:48:16 <conman> there is a disincentive for them to propagate transactions
1624 2012-10-21 21:48:19 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: except the funny thing is that the one point of influence we'd want to push is increased decenteralization and transparency...
1625 2012-10-21 21:48:28 <conman> you will end up with pools once again limiting bitcoin transactions
1626 2012-10-21 21:48:30 <sipa> gmaxwell: i just don't think we can
1627 2012-10-21 21:48:32 <conman> that is a very real risk
1628 2012-10-21 21:48:43 <Luke-Jr> slush1: BIP != bitcoind
1629 2012-10-21 21:48:57 <Luke-Jr> BIP = Bitcoin community
1630 2012-10-21 21:48:58 <slush1> ok, why gmaxwell asked me to write bip for stratum?
1631 2012-10-21 21:49:02 <conman> if pools choose to not use stratum and just gbt to talk to miners, they will cap transactions at some arbitrary limit
1632 2012-10-21 21:49:14 <Luke-Jr> slush1: becuase every standardized protocol should go through a BIP
1633 2012-10-21 21:49:24 <gmaxwell> conman: you're talking about no more than about 4096 32 byte hashes per ten minutes...
1634 2012-10-21 21:49:26 <slush1> Luke-Jr: said who, competetive pool operator? :-P
1635 2012-10-21 21:49:28 <conman> this is the inherent problem with bip22/3 as it atm
1636 2012-10-21 21:49:39 <Luke-Jr> slush1: said BIP 1
1637 2012-10-21 21:49:51 <gmaxwell> slush1: thats not polite.
1638 2012-10-21 21:49:59 ThomasV has joined
1639 2012-10-21 21:50:07 <conman> gmaxwell, 128k ? delivered to every miner every 30 seconds ?
1640 2012-10-21 21:50:16 <conman> you dont think that will worry them?
1641 2012-10-21 21:50:26 <conman> instead of a few hundred bytes?
1642 2012-10-21 21:50:35 <gmaxwell> conman: every .. 30 seconds? um. Stop being broken. Part of why you can do this is to roll locally.
1643 2012-10-21 21:50:42 <conman> groan
1644 2012-10-21 21:50:45 <sipa> slush1: well, i would certainly have preferred you following the BIP process
1645 2012-10-21 21:50:50 <conman> how do they then get the transactions gmaxwell ??
1646 2012-10-21 21:51:01 <conman> the miners get the transaction list from the pool
1647 2012-10-21 21:51:20 <slush1> sipa: Give me a single reason why this should be in BIP, please.
1648 2012-10-21 21:51:20 <conman> if they never update their list of transactions then all block solves will be with zero transactions
1649 2012-10-21 21:51:36 <gmaxwell> slush1: because it's software you expect someone other than you to also implement.
1650 2012-10-21 21:51:57 <slush1> gmaxwell: ok, then HTTP should be in BIP as well, because it is used by 90% of miners
1651 2012-10-21 21:52:02 <sipa> slush1: so the community can easily see what proposals have been made, without needing to google them, for one?
1652 2012-10-21 21:52:14 <sipa> slush1: the B is still Bitcoin in BIP
1653 2012-10-21 21:52:14 <Luke-Jr> HTTP has a more general standard since it is used by more than just Bitcoin
1654 2012-10-21 21:52:32 <sipa> and HTTP has an RFC, which is the same at a different level, really
1655 2012-10-21 21:52:34 <gmaxwell> slush1: come on now. We don't have to define the transistor and C language in BIPs even though we expect people to use them.
1656 2012-10-21 21:52:45 <conman> sigh
1657 2012-10-21 21:52:53 <conman> anyone want to talk transactions here?
1658 2012-10-21 21:52:58 <conman> never mind, I'l lbe back in 15 mins
1659 2012-10-21 21:52:58 <gmaxwell> BIPs are for of the shared bitcoin infrastructure. We don't put bitcoind implementation specifics in BIPs.. just protocol stuff.
1660 2012-10-21 21:53:00 <conman> ->afk
1661 2012-10-21 21:53:01 <sipa> but let's not discussion about how things need to be discussed
1662 2012-10-21 21:53:16 <slush1> Ok, should be deterministic wallet used by Electrum client defined in BIP?
1663 2012-10-21 21:53:23 <Luke-Jr> slush1: that's BIP 34
1664 2012-10-21 21:53:24 <gmaxwell> hahah
1665 2012-10-21 21:53:25 <gmaxwell> Yes.
1666 2012-10-21 21:53:32 <sipa> slush1: yes, please
1667 2012-10-21 21:53:32 <slush1> Luke-Jr: but Electrum don't use that BIP!
1668 2012-10-21 21:53:37 <Luke-Jr> err, not 34
1669 2012-10-21 21:53:40 <sipa> well, they don't have to
1670 2012-10-21 21:53:51 <gmaxwell> And in fact we've been working on a proposal which integrates armorys work for people to use for more than just bitcoind.
1671 2012-10-21 21:53:52 <Luke-Jr> BIP 32
1672 2012-10-21 21:53:54 <sipa> i'd prefer them to of course, but that's not my decision to make
1673 2012-10-21 21:54:03 <gmaxwell> As sipa says.
1674 2012-10-21 21:54:10 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1675 2012-10-21 21:54:31 <sipa> but at least by publishing it in a standardized way, it's easy for others to see which proposals they want to follow
1676 2012-10-21 21:54:34 <gmaxwell> (and it would sure be nice if electrum devs contributed to BIP 34 to make sure that all clients could use a common representation if it is at all possible.
1677 2012-10-21 21:55:04 asuk has joined
1678 2012-10-21 21:55:08 <Luke-Jr> probably a good part of why the BIP process is there, is so people get the opportunity to deal with problems/conflicts BEFORE the protocol is finished, and hopefully not have any reason to "hold out" later
1679 2012-10-21 21:55:11 <gmaxwell> ) Of course, if the goals are too different that won't happen but at least there is a possiblity.
1680 2012-10-21 21:55:32 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: you mean bip 32, or really 34?
1681 2012-10-21 21:55:36 <sipa> no, 32
1682 2012-10-21 21:55:43 <Luke-Jr> slush1: for example, if you had voiced your concerns with GBT during the ~8 month development window, it's quite probable it would have come out as a BIP specifying Stratum!
1683 2012-10-21 21:55:45 <gmaxwell> oops 32.
1684 2012-10-21 21:55:50 <Luke-Jr> (without the limitations of Stratum of course)
1685 2012-10-21 21:55:55 <sipa> implementers can have very good reasons not to follow them (from "i'm too lazy to read it" to "that doesn't fit what we're trying to do")
1686 2012-10-21 21:55:58 <slush1> sipa: at some stage, Electrum will start using that BIP for sure. As well Stratum, if it will be adopted by the community, why don't write BIP later. But saying "we preffer solution XXX because it has a BIP?"
1687 2012-10-21 21:56:21 <slush1> Luke-Jr: no, I wanted to create optimized protocol, no spend months of discussion on it.
1688 2012-10-21 21:56:24 <gmaxwell> Writing BIPs after the fact is the bad last resort when the process has failed.
1689 2012-10-21 21:56:27 <slush1> I can enjoy those discussion now
1690 2012-10-21 21:56:34 <gmaxwell> Early implementations are good too, however.
1691 2012-10-21 21:56:46 <gmaxwell> Just like we had GMP before GBT.
1692 2012-10-21 21:56:47 <Luke-Jr> slush1: you can do both. I had GBT implemented (in an earlier draft form) since February!
1693 2012-10-21 21:56:56 <gmaxwell> And GMP told us what we goofed up there and missed.
1694 2012-10-21 21:57:45 <gmaxwell> Ideally public discussion and expirementation go at once; in the IETF model, for example, heavy weight is given to designs that have running code.
1695 2012-10-21 21:58:11 <slush1> ok, we can discuss about "what had to been done". But it is pointless
1696 2012-10-21 21:58:43 <Luke-Jr> fair enough
1697 2012-10-21 21:58:50 <slush1> I spent my own time on designing and implementing Stratum and I personally don't see any reason why the proposal and implementation should be changed, because it perfectly do the job for which it has been designed.
1698 2012-10-21 21:59:00 <slush1> We can now discuss if I should write a BIP for it
1699 2012-10-21 21:59:04 <slush1> maybe, I'm not against it
1700 2012-10-21 21:59:17 <sipa> slush1: nobody can force you to change the implementation
1701 2012-10-21 21:59:24 <Luke-Jr> slush1: but its "job for which it has been designed" dealt with only 1 of many problems getwork had
1702 2012-10-21 21:59:35 <slush1> Luke-Jr: come on
1703 2012-10-21 21:59:51 <sipa> well so be it, i think stratum succeeds in what it tries to be
1704 2012-10-21 21:59:59 <sipa> and that is different from GBT
1705 2012-10-21 22:00:24 <gmaxwell> "any reason why the proposal and implementation should be changed" and that kind of stickyness is why working on things like that in secret kinda stinks, and why design and implementation should run concurrently in public.
1706 2012-10-21 22:00:34 <slush1> as I said many times, I think GBT succeed at least in the part of extracting block creation outside the bitcoind.
1707 2012-10-21 22:00:54 <slush1> gmaxwell: ok, what you propose to change?
1708 2012-10-21 22:01:23 <gmaxwell> slush1: You've changed the thing I thought should be changed the most. :P
1709 2012-10-21 22:01:27 <slush1> gmaxwell: btw you proposed the idea of extracting transactions outside the pool. And you see, I implemented it today.
1710 2012-10-21 22:01:48 <Luke-Jr> slush1: the first thing I would change about Stratum, is requiring the server to give miners the details behind the merkle links at least when asked
1711 2012-10-21 22:02:08 <slush1> Luke-Jr: it is already implemented
1712 2012-10-21 22:02:17 <Luke-Jr> slush1: oh? I missed that somehow
1713 2012-10-21 22:02:20 <gmaxwell> slush1: Right!
1714 2012-10-21 22:03:59 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: a fair point (your last msg to me, many minutes ago)
1715 2012-10-21 22:04:26 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1716 2012-10-21 22:05:45 RainbowDashh has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1717 2012-10-21 22:05:47 asuk has joined
1718 2012-10-21 22:06:38 <sipa> jgarzik: so, you like to encourage a decentralized (i suppose) way of block creation in bitcoind - i can't have anything against that, but I don't see how making it easier to mine with less transparancy over GBT helps with that
1719 2012-10-21 22:07:27 <sipa> i may have exaggerated when saying that we shouldn't care about the mining business, but in my opinion we've done what we can with GBT
1720 2012-10-21 22:07:37 <gmaxwell> sipa: here is an argument on those lines: if miner authors won't implement GBT then it's harder for people to solo mine.
1721 2012-10-21 22:07:54 <gmaxwell> but I think BFGminer currently moots that point, at least for now.
1722 2012-10-21 22:08:54 <sipa> right, when the merklepath-only-GBT would be used within a trusted domain, it provides the extra performance without losing any decentralization
1723 2012-10-21 22:09:06 <slush1> sipa: btw about ultraprune - as somebody else wrote in the discussion, I'm affraid that when bitcoind will have a mode to become just a client (don't keep non-pruned blockchain), count of nodes will go dramatically down. Currently there's good reason to run full node - privacy. But with pruned client, the security is the same.
1724 2012-10-21 22:09:24 <sipa> slush1: maybe, and maybe not
1725 2012-10-21 22:09:26 <slush1> sipa: I'm not saying anything new, just I'm expressing my fears
1726 2012-10-21 22:09:34 <Luke-Jr> sipa: I'd just figure use Stratum in that case
1727 2012-10-21 22:09:52 <gmaxwell> slush1: We're going to work to make that not happen.
1728 2012-10-21 22:09:59 <gmaxwell> slush1: and I think we know how.
1729 2012-10-21 22:10:06 <slush1> gmaxwell: how?
1730 2012-10-21 22:10:06 <maaku> slush1: maybe, but that's 100% hypothetical at this point
1731 2012-10-21 22:10:13 <maaku> ultraprune doesn't actually prune
1732 2012-10-21 22:10:23 <slush1> maaku: I know, I'm thinking about the future
1733 2012-10-21 22:10:27 <sipa> sure, but pruning is certainly within perspective now
1734 2012-10-21 22:10:32 RainbowDashh has joined
1735 2012-10-21 22:10:35 <conman> so
1736 2012-10-21 22:10:38 <slush1> sipa: ok
1737 2012-10-21 22:10:42 * conman reads backlog
1738 2012-10-21 22:11:13 <slush1> conman: nobody won, me and Luke-Jr are both dead after the match :-P
1739 2012-10-21 22:11:13 <conman> ok
1740 2012-10-21 22:11:13 <sipa> slush1: anyway, the internet already provides multi-gigabyte downloads - i don't think bandwidth nor storage are technically a problem to provide by those who care about bitcoind
1741 2012-10-21 22:11:19 <gmaxwell> slush1: By making it so all reference clients start in SPV mode and do the rest in the background without disrupting the user... then automatically become full nodes if the system has enough resources to support it.. if this is done well we'll get the maximum amount of full nodes, and few people will go find the (hidden?) option to force client mode.
1742 2012-10-21 22:11:50 <slush1> gmaxwell: heh, I see.
1743 2012-10-21 22:11:54 <gmaxwell> basically by making it as painless as possible and making the prosocial behavior the default.
1744 2012-10-21 22:12:28 <conman> jgarzik,
1745 2012-10-21 22:12:33 <ThomasV> until someone releases an antisocial version
1746 2012-10-21 22:12:49 <Luke-Jr> ThomasV: why run that instead?
1747 2012-10-21 22:12:50 <conman> that will happen a good microsecond later
1748 2012-10-21 22:12:54 <sipa> slush1: even without the mode gmaxwell suggests here, if you have archive nodes (which advertize as such) and validation nodes (which don't advertize their ability to provide block history), performance may even improve, as people who don't have the bandwidth or cap it in someway, won't be contacted anyway
1749 2012-10-21 22:13:03 <slush1> sipa: I'm really looking forward improved performance of blockchain database, because currently (and with rising blockchain size) it becomes a pain. You know, it isn't about bandwidth and storage, but more about local IOPS :-(
1750 2012-10-21 22:13:04 <gmaxwell> ThomasV: no motivation to have it... the prosocial version won't become a full node if you clearly dont have a lot of free resources.
1751 2012-10-21 22:13:07 <ThomasV> Luke-Jr: uses less resources
1752 2012-10-21 22:13:18 xisalty has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1753 2012-10-21 22:13:27 <sipa> slush1: not saying that will happen - i share you feer - just saying that there's another side as well
1754 2012-10-21 22:13:38 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: it could work
1755 2012-10-21 22:13:38 <Luke-Jr> ThomasV: even if Bitcoin-Qt as-is deletes stuff on its own if it sees you getting low on space?
1756 2012-10-21 22:13:49 <gmaxwell> ThomasV: right. Best theory I have now. It's a serious concern however.
1757 2012-10-21 22:14:30 <gmaxwell> This is also why I think that things like ultraprune and leveldb are higher priority than spv mode.. first being a full node must be as painless as possible.
1758 2012-10-21 22:14:44 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: you can count on electrum nodes, they will never prune :)
1759 2012-10-21 22:14:47 <conman> I guess I wait till jgarzik is alive again before I can discuss it any further
1760 2012-10-21 22:15:13 <slush1> ThomasV: how so, index everything to Abe and prune blockchain will work :-P
1761 2012-10-21 22:15:21 <slush1> ThomasV: why to support bitcoin network for free anyway :-P
1762 2012-10-21 22:15:39 tcatm has quit ()
1763 2012-10-21 22:15:44 <ThomasV> slush1: not sure if serious..
1764 2012-10-21 22:15:47 <slush1> s/prune blockchain/pruned blockchain/
1765 2012-10-21 22:15:51 <slush1> ThomasV: no
1766 2012-10-21 22:15:58 <slush1> but it is possibility, for sure
1767 2012-10-21 22:16:11 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1768 2012-10-21 22:16:14 <ThomasV> Abe is something we need to get rid of
1769 2012-10-21 22:16:15 <gmaxwell> ThomasV: slush1: could you make a brief writeup of everything you need from bitcoind so that electrum server could be a thin proxy on top of it?
1770 2012-10-21 22:16:54 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: sure. I finished SPV today
1771 2012-10-21 22:17:00 <slush1> gmaxwell: https://github.com/slush0/stratum-mining/blob/master/lib/block_template.py
1772 2012-10-21 22:17:04 xisalty has joined
1773 2012-10-21 22:17:06 TD has joined
1774 2012-10-21 22:17:07 <slush1> gmaxwell: method "fill_from_rpc"
1775 2012-10-21 22:17:34 <sipa> ThomasV: electrum clients do SPV?
1776 2012-10-21 22:17:42 <ThomasV> sipa: not yet
1777 2012-10-21 22:17:42 <slush1> gmaxwell: + submitblock call, of course
1778 2012-10-21 22:17:57 <ThomasV> sipa: I am working on it
1779 2012-10-21 22:18:02 <sipa> that'd be very nice
1780 2012-10-21 22:18:06 <Luke-Jr> slush1: that looks like it only works with bitcoind
1781 2012-10-21 22:18:31 <slush1> Luke-Jr: yes, what other dependency did you expect?
1782 2012-10-21 22:18:43 <gmaxwell> ThomasV: thank you! <3 It's so rewarding to know that you're stepping up and doing that stuff!
1783 2012-10-21 22:18:59 <Luke-Jr> slush1: I think sipa was thinking it was compatible with any standard GBT server
1784 2012-10-21 22:19:18 <slush1> Luke-Jr: eh, I don't know what means "any standard GBT server"
1785 2012-10-21 22:19:25 <slush1> But it works with GBT implementation in bitcoind
1786 2012-10-21 22:19:53 <Luke-Jr> slush1: so miners could run it with a GBT pool, for example
1787 2012-10-21 22:20:09 <sipa> Luke-Jr: why would it not?
1788 2012-10-21 22:20:10 <ThomasV> gmaxwell, sipa: well, it is a minimal version of spv for the moment. I have not pushed it yet, I broke too many things in the refactoring
1789 2012-10-21 22:20:26 <slush1> Luke-Jr: how the API differs from bitcoind implementation?
1790 2012-10-21 22:20:29 <Luke-Jr> sipa: it looks like it only works with coinbasevalue, not coinbasetx
1791 2012-10-21 22:20:44 <slush1> yes, I forget, it also requires something to ping on new block (it doesn't implement long polling)
1792 2012-10-21 22:20:49 <gmaxwell> sipa: I think initially he's doing SPV without longest chain selection, but it proves txns are mined.
1793 2012-10-21 22:21:02 <sipa> one step at the time, i guess
1794 2012-10-21 22:21:03 <Luke-Jr> slush1: the server provides the coinbase transaction basis instead of just a value
1795 2012-10-21 22:21:24 <Luke-Jr> to be fair, Eloipool is only compatible with bitcoind upstream right now too
1796 2012-10-21 22:21:36 <Luke-Jr> (though the "loop" branch aims to address that eventually)
1797 2012-10-21 22:21:40 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1798 2012-10-21 22:21:57 <slush1> Luke-Jr: that's the problem; I don't understand GBT enough to implement it 100%
1799 2012-10-21 22:22:02 ivan\ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1800 2012-10-21 22:22:09 <slush1> and it also wasn't purpose. I targeted to use it with GBT
1801 2012-10-21 22:22:12 asuk has joined
1802 2012-10-21 22:22:13 <slush1> with bitcoind, sorry
1803 2012-10-21 22:22:14 <sipa> slush1: i'm sure that if you ask nicely, Luke-Jr will help :)
1804 2012-10-21 22:22:21 <slush1> lol
1805 2012-10-21 22:22:48 <Luke-Jr> if I had time, I might even write the code changes myself :P
1806 2012-10-21 22:22:56 <slush1> Luke-Jr: if you can provide some patch which will make it work together any other GBT interface, just poke me
1807 2012-10-21 22:22:58 <sipa> not that you have to, but compatibility between different GBT software would be nice
1808 2012-10-21 22:23:03 <Luke-Jr> unfortunately, I'm fighting with this X6500 FPGA which requires me to implement a userspace FT232R and JTAG implementationâ¦
1809 2012-10-21 22:23:24 <slush1> Luke-Jr: I didn't know that "pool
1810 2012-10-21 22:23:31 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
1811 2012-10-21 22:23:34 ivan\ has joined
1812 2012-10-21 22:23:35 <slush1> "pool's GBT" and "bitcoind GBT" are different :-P
1813 2012-10-21 22:23:49 * jgarzik scrolls back
1814 2012-10-21 22:23:58 <jgarzik> conman: sorry, tons of family activity on the weekend
1815 2012-10-21 22:24:02 <conman> no probs
1816 2012-10-21 22:24:04 <Luke-Jr> slush1: bitcoind only implements a very minimal subset of GBT âº
1817 2012-10-21 22:24:05 <conman> understand fully
1818 2012-10-21 22:24:38 <slush1> Luke-Jr: so when Stratum server depends on this minimal subset of GBT, it should work with everything, right?
1819 2012-10-21 22:24:48 <Luke-Jr> slush1: it might be useful to read python-blkmaker code?
1820 2012-10-21 22:25:01 <slush1> Luke-Jr: eh, I tried once, but failed :(
1821 2012-10-21 22:25:30 <jgarzik> conman: if you can say with technical specificity "I need <this data structure with this contents>" here or in email, I can take a look in T+4 hours or so
1822 2012-10-21 22:25:33 <Luke-Jr> slush1: O.o
1823 2012-10-21 22:25:38 <slush1> Luke-Jr: this? http://gitorious.org/bitcoin/python-blkmaker/blobs/master/blkmaker.py
1824 2012-10-21 22:25:45 <Luke-Jr> slush1: yes
1825 2012-10-21 22:25:50 Raziel__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1826 2012-10-21 22:25:54 <jgarzik> conman: I readily admit that BIP 23 is still a dizzying array of features
1827 2012-10-21 22:26:09 <conman> heh
1828 2012-10-21 22:26:35 <slush1> Luke-Jr: sorry, this is really unreadable for me
1829 2012-10-21 22:26:59 <Luke-Jr> slush1: why?
1830 2012-10-21 22:27:02 dlb76 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1831 2012-10-21 22:28:03 <jgarzik> slush1: in broad strokes, IMHO, BIP 22 is "minimal GBT" and BIP 23 is "dizzying array of additional stuff that luke-jr thought might be useful" ;-) Some of BIP 23 is clearly useful, some of BIP 23 might be useful if I understood the use case, and some is just plain weird
1832 2012-10-21 22:28:10 * jgarzik tried to separate 22 & 23
1833 2012-10-21 22:28:29 <slush1> Luke-Jr: ok, can you describe in human-readable form where's the mistake in my code?
1834 2012-10-21 22:28:38 <Diablo-D3> maybe 23 should be further split?
1835 2012-10-21 22:28:41 <slush1> blkmaker is unreadable, without some comments
1836 2012-10-21 22:28:44 <Diablo-D3> theres nothing wrong with that
1837 2012-10-21 22:28:57 <jgarzik> Diablo-D3: indeed, perhaps
1838 2012-10-21 22:29:20 <Luke-Jr> slush1: the obvious problem is that a pool will provide you with 'coinbasetxn' instead of 'coinbasevalue', and you are assuming the latter only
1839 2012-10-21 22:29:31 <sipa> jgarzik: it seems -reindex on top of ultraprune is somewhat more complex (though i like the fact that -reindex, -loadblock and bootstrap.dat are now dealt with in one place in init.cpp, and that AcceptBlock works for the genesis block)
1840 2012-10-21 22:29:37 iToast has joined
1841 2012-10-21 22:29:40 <iToast> hi
1842 2012-10-21 22:29:42 osmosis has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1843 2012-10-21 22:29:58 <Luke-Jr> slush1: "coinbasetxn" is formatted as an Object: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0022#Transactions_Object_Format
1844 2012-10-21 22:30:02 OneFixt_ is now known as OneFixt
1845 2012-10-21 22:30:05 <slush1> Luke-Jr: ok, and what's expected behaviour then? Firstly detects coinbasetxn and use it, or firstly detect coinbasevalue and use it?
1846 2012-10-21 22:30:12 <jgarzik> sipa: related: should I delete my branch? It sounds like you're banging it out on ultraprune
1847 2012-10-21 22:30:44 <Luke-Jr> slush1: if coinbasetxn is present, then it should be used
1848 2012-10-21 22:30:51 <sipa> jgarzik: depends on how large you consider the chance we'll need to revert ultraprune, i guess :p
1849 2012-10-21 22:30:55 <slush1> Luke-Jr: of course the pool code "as is" want's to create its own coinbase transaction.
1850 2012-10-21 22:30:58 <Luke-Jr> slush1: in practice, I don't know any implementations that provide both
1851 2012-10-21 22:31:30 optimator has joined
1852 2012-10-21 22:31:30 optimator has quit (Changing host)
1853 2012-10-21 22:31:30 optimator has joined
1854 2012-10-21 22:32:12 <slush1> Luke-Jr: ok, how can I know how to modify extranonce in that coinbase transaction?
1855 2012-10-21 22:32:15 <Luke-Jr> slush1: to be compatible with coinbasetxn, you would need to only append the scriptSig of the coinbase, not replace it entirely
1856 2012-10-21 22:33:04 <slush1> ok, so I should take coinbasetxn and modify coinbase in it as I want, right?
1857 2012-10-21 22:33:04 <sipa> jgarzik: part of the complexity in my branch also comes from the fact that it runs in parallel with a working node, not before
1858 2012-10-21 22:33:06 optimator_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1859 2012-10-21 22:33:23 <Luke-Jr> slush1: only by appending the scriptSig part, yes
1860 2012-10-21 22:33:49 <Luke-Jr> slush1: the easy way to do that is split it into two parts (as Stratum does)
1861 2012-10-21 22:34:14 <Luke-Jr> the length of the first part is 41 + cbtxn[41]
1862 2012-10-21 22:34:26 <Luke-Jr> you also need to increment cbtxn[41] by how many bytes you add
1863 2012-10-21 22:35:09 <slush1> Luke-Jr: ok, basically passing whole template to "coinbase_transaction_class" would be enough. Then poolmode versus proxymode can be made by switching coinbase transaction class to different implementation
1864 2012-10-21 22:35:42 <slush1> ah, that's that magic 41 from blkmaker ;)
1865 2012-10-21 22:35:48 <slush1> I think you should use comments a bit more
1866 2012-10-21 22:35:57 <Luke-Jr> I probably should
1867 2012-10-21 22:36:25 <Luke-Jr> especially for numeric constants like that⦠:/
1868 2012-10-21 22:38:26 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1869 2012-10-21 22:41:34 <slush1> Luke-Jr: if you'll have some spare time, can you try to implement coinbase class (like https://github.com/slush0/stratum-mining/blob/master/lib/coinbasetx.py) which will fully comply with GBT?
1870 2012-10-21 22:41:56 <Luke-Jr> slush1: maybe; it will likely be a while until I have spare time, unfortunately :<
1871 2012-10-21 22:41:59 <slush1> You can expect that unserialized template is in constructor...
1872 2012-10-21 22:42:08 <jgarzik> sipa: <gentle reminder> please include pull req/issue numbers, for referencing earlier pull reqs. Just closed mine. I seriously doubt we'll revert ;p Even if so, it is trivial to recreate
1873 2012-10-21 22:42:46 <sipa> jgarzik: well, i would have had t look it up myself as well , but i'll keep it in mind :)
1874 2012-10-21 22:42:52 <jgarzik> hehe
1875 2012-10-21 22:42:59 <jgarzik> I was surprising at how easy -reindex was, to implement
1876 2012-10-21 22:43:03 <jgarzik> *surprised
1877 2012-10-21 22:43:33 <jgarzik> LoadExternalBlockFile() opened several new doors, so to speak
1878 2012-10-21 22:43:37 <jgarzik> very happy with that
1879 2012-10-21 22:44:21 <sipa> i'm considering a -importfromprocess or so, which spawns a script that is supposed to produce block data on stdout
1880 2012-10-21 22:44:43 <sipa> where you could use curl or some script that first runs bittorrent, or ...
1881 2012-10-21 22:45:09 arij has joined
1882 2012-10-21 22:45:21 arij is now known as Guest73225
1883 2012-10-21 22:45:30 <jgarzik> -importfromstdin :)
1884 2012-10-21 22:45:41 <jgarzik> that works for all of those and more
1885 2012-10-21 22:45:43 <sipa> right
1886 2012-10-21 22:46:07 <sipa> although you could perhaps better write a script that takes that as stdin, armors it in bitcoin "block" messages, and sends it to the P2P port
1887 2012-10-21 22:46:07 <jgarzik> but agreed on concept, either way
1888 2012-10-21 22:46:19 <sipa> or via submitblock RPC?
1889 2012-10-21 22:46:27 <jgarzik> that's an idea
1890 2012-10-21 22:46:37 <jgarzik> definitely want to figure out HTTP & torrent workflow
1891 2012-10-21 22:46:58 <jgarzik> certainly straightforward to do an importer using RPC
1892 2012-10-21 22:47:08 <sipa> more overhead as well
1893 2012-10-21 22:47:28 <jgarzik> indeed
1894 2012-10-21 22:49:53 <jgarzik> my design for a bitcoin-firstrun.exe was to have good knowledge of how DataDir behaves and should look -- mimic bitcoind's method for discovery and initialization -- and plop the block files in the correct places. Then exec(2) bitcoin*.exe with -reindex.
1895 2012-10-21 22:50:32 <jgarzik> not claiming it's the greatest idea in the world, but it is relevant to the discussion
1896 2012-10-21 22:50:34 <sipa> i think it may be simple enough to just do it in bitcoind
1897 2012-10-21 22:50:47 <jgarzik> yeah, calling a script works
1898 2012-10-21 22:50:51 <jgarzik> *process
1899 2012-10-21 22:51:34 <D34TH> --loadscript=firstrun.bit
1900 2012-10-21 22:51:42 <jgarzik> class CImportingNow is terribly cute and very RAII
1901 2012-10-21 22:51:52 <sipa> overkill though :)
1902 2012-10-21 22:52:29 <D34TH> sipa: likes his coffee straight black, sugar is too overkill
1903 2012-10-21 22:52:30 <D34TH> :D
1904 2012-10-21 22:52:45 <sipa> D34TH: i certainly drink it without milk!
1905 2012-10-21 22:53:00 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1906 2012-10-21 22:53:02 <sipa> it's really just checking: if $DATADIR/blocks doesn't exist, move (or copy, user's decision) the blk000?.dat files to blocks (perhaps split them in smaller parts), delete blkindex.dat, and continue as if -reindex had been provided
1907 2012-10-21 22:54:05 <jgarzik> sipa: you are one of those coders who likes explicit NULL checks, eh?
1908 2012-10-21 22:54:05 <jgarzik> ;p
1909 2012-10-21 22:54:09 <D34TH> but if you have scripts you can allow people to write their own scripts for bitcoin and maybe introduce a whole new set of people into language
1910 2012-10-21 22:54:17 <sipa> jgarzik: it's clearer
1911 2012-10-21 22:54:33 <jgarzik> nah :)
1912 2012-10-21 22:54:46 <jgarzik> other way is shorter and just as clear ;p
1913 2012-10-21 22:58:08 <edcba> allow ppl not knowing programming to program for bitcoin :)
1914 2012-10-21 22:58:22 <edcba> looks like a good idea !
1915 2012-10-21 23:00:17 <Luke-Jr> edcba: cute
1916 2012-10-21 23:00:19 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1917 2012-10-21 23:00:48 <Luke-Jr> edcba: was that intentional btw? :P
1918 2012-10-21 23:04:58 <edcba> no i just cat /dev/random into files and hope it compiles
1919 2012-10-21 23:08:55 <Luke-Jr> -.-
1920 2012-10-21 23:09:10 <sipa> well that works *sometimes*
1921 2012-10-21 23:09:23 <sipa> you're better off playing the lottery though
1922 2012-10-21 23:10:37 dust-otc has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1923 2012-10-21 23:10:57 <Luke-Jr> I read edcba's second line as "looks like a good idea - not"
1924 2012-10-21 23:11:03 da2ce7 has joined
1925 2012-10-21 23:11:14 dust-otc has joined
1926 2012-10-21 23:12:12 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
1927 2012-10-21 23:14:20 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1928 2012-10-21 23:15:31 <Luke-Jr> grumble @ Atlas abusing forum thread lock to control who can post
1929 2012-10-21 23:16:15 harkon_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1930 2012-10-21 23:16:21 mykhal has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1931 2012-10-21 23:16:26 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
1932 2012-10-21 23:17:26 harkon_ has joined
1933 2012-10-21 23:19:29 harkon_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1934 2012-10-21 23:20:07 harkon_ has joined
1935 2012-10-21 23:20:59 harkon_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1936 2012-10-21 23:21:01 BlueMattBot has quit ()
1937 2012-10-21 23:21:42 harkon_ has joined
1938 2012-10-21 23:21:43 mykhal has joined
1939 2012-10-21 23:23:44 BlueMattBot has joined
1940 2012-10-21 23:23:52 <BlueMatt> since pull-tester's inception, it has tested 21591 individual commit ids
1941 2012-10-21 23:24:06 <sipa> wow, seriously? :S
1942 2012-10-21 23:24:35 <sipa> wait, a single pull request with 10 commits, counts as 1 or as 10?
1943 2012-10-21 23:24:40 <BlueMatt> 10
1944 2012-10-21 23:24:52 <BlueMatt> I never thought the "put the list of tested commits in a flat file" idea was gonna turn out to be kinda big, but its now 865K
1945 2012-10-21 23:24:52 <sipa> ok, still, very impressive number
1946 2012-10-21 23:25:00 zveda has joined
1947 2012-10-21 23:25:14 <zveda> hi, when I run 0.7.1 64-bit I get this error
1948 2012-10-21 23:25:25 <zveda> "Error initializing database environment"
1949 2012-10-21 23:25:33 <zveda> but 0.7.0 still runs normally
1950 2012-10-21 23:25:49 <sipa> how are they compiled?
1951 2012-10-21 23:25:49 <zveda> I am in linux mint
1952 2012-10-21 23:25:59 <zveda> the 0.7.0 is from the ubuntu ppa
1953 2012-10-21 23:26:07 <zveda> the 0.7.1 I dled from bitcoin.org
1954 2012-10-21 23:26:17 <zveda> i just ran the linux package
1955 2012-10-21 23:26:20 <zveda> the bin folder
1956 2012-10-21 23:26:29 <sipa> right - that won't work - the BDB versions are incompatible (as specified in the release notes, btw :p)
1957 2012-10-21 23:26:35 <BlueMatt> ok...maybe the script has a bug...there are a ton of duplicates...nevermind
1958 2012-10-21 23:26:35 <sipa> run the old one with -detachdb first
1959 2012-10-21 23:26:40 <sipa> exit cleanly
1960 2012-10-21 23:26:45 <sipa> and then start the new one
1961 2012-10-21 23:27:31 <zveda> i tried that
1962 2012-10-21 23:27:34 <zveda> still same ting
1963 2012-10-21 23:29:19 <sipa> hmm, that shouldn't happen
1964 2012-10-21 23:29:22 <sipa> anything in debug.log ?
1965 2012-10-21 23:30:04 Aexoden has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1966 2012-10-21 23:30:12 Aexoden has joined
1967 2012-10-21 23:30:27 <zveda> yep
1968 2012-10-21 23:30:28 <zveda> ERROR: CDB() : error DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery (-30974) opening database environment
1969 2012-10-21 23:30:43 <sipa> meh
1970 2012-10-21 23:30:47 * sipa hates BDB
1971 2012-10-21 23:31:06 <zveda> in db.log: Unacceptable log file /home/ilia/.bitcoin/database/log.0000000687: unsupported log version 16
1972 2012-10-21 23:31:06 <zveda> Invalid log file: log.0000000687: Invalid argument
1973 2012-10-21 23:31:06 <zveda> PANIC: Invalid argument
1974 2012-10-21 23:31:06 <zveda> process-private: unable to find environment
1975 2012-10-21 23:31:28 <gmaxwell> sipa: any objection to pulling the future coins spent fix now? it looks sane and fixes it for me and I'd rather not have more unwelcome surprises for people who load up git master.
1976 2012-10-21 23:31:35 <sipa> gmaxwell: go ahead
1977 2012-10-21 23:32:14 <sipa> zveda: if you ran with -detachdb, there should not be any log left
1978 2012-10-21 23:32:20 <sipa> zveda: does 0.7.0 still work?
1979 2012-10-21 23:32:33 <zveda> yep
1980 2012-10-21 23:32:36 <zveda> ok i detach again
1981 2012-10-21 23:32:37 dvide has quit ()
1982 2012-10-21 23:33:01 <D34TH> is it possible that when using detachdb to convert it to bootstrap.dat?
1983 2012-10-21 23:33:23 <sipa> no
1984 2012-10-21 23:33:25 <zveda> o I have bootstrap.dat file also.. should i delete it ?
1985 2012-10-21 23:33:36 <sipa> bootstrap.dat contains blocks, it has nothing to do with databases
1986 2012-10-21 23:33:50 <sipa> zveda: no
1987 2012-10-21 23:34:30 <zveda> i did detachdb and i still have the db.log
1988 2012-10-21 23:34:48 <sipa> what is your exact command line you used?
1989 2012-10-21 23:35:45 <zveda> bitcoin-qt -detachdb
1990 2012-10-21 23:35:52 <zveda> also i ticked the detach database at shutdown option
1991 2012-10-21 23:36:37 <sipa> hmm, ok
1992 2012-10-21 23:36:54 <zveda> y is it saying panic in there
1993 2012-10-21 23:36:56 <sipa> do that again, and delete the database/ directory (or rather, move it)
1994 2012-10-21 23:37:19 <sipa> oh, make a wallet backup first
1995 2012-10-21 23:38:20 freakazoid has joined
1996 2012-10-21 23:38:27 <zveda> so I run the 0.7.1 now ?
1997 2012-10-21 23:38:47 <zveda> oo it is loading
1998 2012-10-21 23:39:04 <zveda> it is bootstrapping !
1999 2012-10-21 23:39:57 <gmaxwell> sipa: I've seen this before, but I couldn't figure out how to tell if loading without the detach corrupted it or if there isn't just some version of bdb floating around that is just not compatible even if detached.
2000 2012-10-21 23:40:11 <zveda> ok it's loaded. thx sipa !
2001 2012-10-21 23:40:25 soaring_eagle has joined
2002 2012-10-21 23:40:48 <zveda> do i need to keep the detachdb option ?
2003 2012-10-21 23:40:51 <sipa> no
2004 2012-10-21 23:40:53 EasyAt is now known as !~Easy@81.17.31.43|EasyAt
2005 2012-10-21 23:41:35 pnicholson has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
2006 2012-10-21 23:42:11 aq83 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2007 2012-10-21 23:42:19 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
2008 2012-10-21 23:44:11 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
2009 2012-10-21 23:46:44 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2010 2012-10-21 23:47:45 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
2011 2012-10-21 23:48:32 servvs has joined
2012 2012-10-21 23:48:59 aq83 has joined
2013 2012-10-21 23:51:31 <zveda> oh my bootstrap.dat got renamed to bootstrap.dat.old
2014 2012-10-21 23:52:22 maaku has joined
2015 2012-10-21 23:52:33 <sipa> that means it was imported fine
2016 2012-10-21 23:53:32 <zveda> kool
2017 2012-10-21 23:54:30 senseless has joined
2018 2012-10-21 23:54:54 senseless is now known as Guest56914
2019 2012-10-21 23:55:39 <sipa> gmaxwell: have you tried running gettxoutsetinfo ?
2020 2012-10-21 23:56:44 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
2021 2012-10-21 23:57:09 <gmaxwell> no ... this is not a very fast rpc call under valgrind
2022 2012-10-21 23:57:33 <sipa> haha, no
2023 2012-10-21 23:57:39 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2024 2012-10-21 23:57:40 <sipa> it scans through the entire txout set
2025 2012-10-21 23:58:02 <gmaxwell> ah, yea, two minutes and still going. :P
2026 2012-10-21 23:58:06 <sipa> but here it takes less than 5 seconds
2027 2012-10-21 23:58:48 <sipa> casascious request for sweeping coins suddenly doesn't seem to unrealistic, even without address-to-txid index (though it may become unwieldly soon)
2028 2012-10-21 23:59:24 <gmaxwell> sweeping coins, like a rescan but only of the txout set?
2029 2012-10-21 23:59:48 <sipa> yes